The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1872-12-14 00:00:00

-
SHOPS VERSUS "STORES."

The following letter, on the above object, appeared In The
Tone, of Monday :
I suppose .t is by the violence of that conduct that
the retail traders hope to crush the to them obnoxious
Civil Service Psi-operative Societies, Upon the
principle that if yon throw sufficient mrel some f it
must stick, the National Chamber of Trsde and its
affiliated uaenibers of Parliament have lately heaped •
volley of virtleat abuse, not only upon the offending
societies, but upon the Civil Service at large, and they
have, I ft Sr contrived to cover under a false issue their
real aim and object, which io to extinguish the healthy
competition to which they have been exposed through
these societies.
The question, in fact, lies in • nutshelL fins any
one tradesmen or any body of tradesmen a vested right
to claim a portion of my income, or anybody eise's

---
income
The theory of the National Chamber of Trade is
that there is inch a vested right. I deny it, and so do
the 25,000 members of the establishments in Monk well.
street and the Haymarket l'pon this rests the whole
matter in dispute, and all the stook invectives employed
against the managers of these establishments are
merely blinds to conceal the true nature of the *triter

tion.
The truth is that the Civil Service Societies have
ahown, and the public have not been slow to learn,
that the profits of the retail tzadeis have of late years
been exorbitant.
They have shown also by the contrast between the
goods sold at their stores and those obtainable at the
ordinary run of shops to what an extent adulteration
has been carried and inferior goods passed off as first-
rate articles. They have demonstrated the power of
the system of cash payments as against that of credit ;
aud for all these things they have incurred the wrath
of the retail trade.
Well, finding that any attack upon the principle if
co operation would be futile, the tradesmen of the
metropolis and their brethren in the country have con.
certrated their energies to crumples the suppression of
the Stores, because their managers are salaried ser-
vants of the State. To bear them talk, one would
imagine that they were the only tax-payers in the land;
that the clerks in the Government offices were in
their private employ, and that all official salaries were
disbursed month by month without the slightest re-
turn on the part of the recipients.
Will it be treason if I just venture to suggest that
the thousands who deal at the Stores are also tax-
payers; that the chrks contribute towards their own
pay more in proportion to their incomes—every penny
of which is t•xed—than any other class, with tne ex-
ception of the Army, Navy, and Clergy, who stand on
the same footing, and that the conduct of the vast
business of the Empire pros es that some little return
is made to the nation for the liberal (?) allowances paid
to its employes
The Chancellor of the Exchequer hoe already stated I
that the tratdemen have no cost against the managers
of the societies. The Government has made a bargain -
so much pay for so many hours of work, and such are) such
quality or work- given the proper attendance at office,
and • zealous and efficient discharge of &Aire and the
bargain is complete on the side of the Civil aervant.
On his leisure hours the Government has no claim
whatever. And as a matter of public policy it is
better that the servants of the State elinuld tempy
their spare time in hr-nest endeavours to increase their
scant pay and keep themselves out of debt, than that
they should fall into • fatal habit of indolence or a still
more fatal course of dissipation.
-• '

Neverthelew, the tradesmen return to the charge,
and say that it ia unfair that Civil wavanta ahould be
allowed to trade. . .

-- -----
Good heavens! 'Unfair to whom? To the State
which employs them? To the public who throng their
Stores? To the community at large which (I aver with !
good knowledge) has benefited by a reduction of prices !
forced upon the shopkeepers by the action of the Civil
Service? No, not unfair to any of these' the enormous
majority of the people, but unfair to the retail trader
only. Far be it from me to set class against class. I
have no wish to interfere with any one ; but the right
whieh the retailer claims of choosing with whi m he
shall deal in the wholesale market I claim for myself,
and the whole public in the retail market.
And I maintain that it is the interest of every con-
sumer to support the Civil Service Societies at the
present juncture, for without doubt if the societies
were to disappear, prices would immediately revert to
their former scalo.
In attacking the societies the Natimal Chamber of
Trade is lighting a shadow, tilting at a winch:tint
Supposing it to be possible—which I dispute - but, for
the sake of argument, supposing it to be possible to
obtain an Act of Parliament having a retrospective
action and framed to prohibit Civil servants making
use of their leisure tours, what would be the
result? Would the societies collapse? Certainly
not. All that could happen would be the retirement of
the directors who might be on the active list, and
whose places would be at once tilled by pensioners,
over whom Government has no control. The societies
would go on just as usual. Their position is alas°.
lutely unassailable before the law, and it will be well
if the tradesmen will look this in the face before any
further ill blood is created.
I am told by friends who incline to espouse the cause
of the retail trade that many think the competition of
the Civil Service unfair, because the Civil servant has
his salary to fall back upon, and the trader has nothing
but his shop to rely upon. All I can say to this is,
that if the poor trader is unfairly weighted against the
Civil servant, be stands in exactly the same position in
regard to the rich trader who starts, as must often
happen, with an assured inherited income. To make
such an argument as this held water there should be a
law that no one with a private income should be
allowed to engage in trade.
Only a word more as regards the Civil servant
What is to be the limit of his discretion in regard to
the employment of his private time? If he is not to
be a director of a co-operative society, may he be
on the committee of a club? May he write a novel
or paint a picture? Having written the novel and
painted the picture, may he sell them? Will not
their sale interfere with the vested rights of the pro-
fessional writer and painter? May he edit a magazine?
Or contribute to the Press? I ask these questions in
sober earnestness, for within my own knowledge the
F.ditor of the Edinburgh Review Is a Civil servant, and
I can tell off upon my fingers artists and writers who
are receiving public salaries, end receiving their
salaries honestly for work honestly and faithfully per-
formed.
In conclusion, with reference to the tradesmen them.
selves, I submit that, as a matter of social, even of
political, economy, they do not exist for their own
benefit at the expense of the community whether they
are wanted or not but only when they are wanted.
No one has a claim to custom simply because he
chooses to set up a shop. And the time has arrived
when it should be stated boldly that there are a great
many more shops than are required to meet the wants
of the community, If there were fewer shop., trades-
men could afford to sell at lower prices, and thus com-
pete with Cooperative Societies upon the only fair
said reasonable ground.
No doubt, it is a bitter pill for the tradesmen to
swallow; but they cannot escape it. Coach proprie-
tors, drivers, stablemen, the whole army of roadside
hotellteepers, waiters, and chambermaids had to find
other occupations when rail, °aids were made ; machi-
nery has superseded hand labour in nearly all our
manufactures, and now tradesmen have to learn that
their number must be limited by the field for their
employment. They cannot resist the march of events,
and the Civil Service Cooperative Societies are only
insignificant items in the forces which I have no doubt
will in time make the ordinary shopkeeper a relic of
the past —I am, &c., G. it. D.
December 7.