CASH v. CREDIT.

Evening Post, Volume LXXXII, Issue 5, 6 July 1906, Page 2

CASH v. CREDIT.

THE CIVIL SERVICE CO-OPERA-TIVE SOCIETY. A LIVELY MEETING. CHAIRMAN REQUESTED TO LEAVE THE CHAIR. A special adjourned meeting of shareholders of the Public Service Co-opera-tive" Association was held last evening. About thirty shareholders attended, and Mr. F. W.- Walmsley presided. Rule 13 of the society's rules provides that "the principle of the society shall be cash sales," and rule 24 makes it obligatory that two-thirds of the shareholders should be present or , represented at a meeting before any alteration of rule 13 can be made. It »&» to consider a motion, to strike out this latter proviso in rule 24 that the meeting was called for last evening. Mr. A. T. who had given notice of motion in the direction indicated, in moving his motion, said he desired to make a few remarks. A shareholder : Is there a- quorum present. The chairman : There is not ; but I believe it is the desire of the meeting to have the matter discussed. (Hear, hear.) The same shareholder asked '[if &ny direct result would follow the discussion V The chairman: So far as we can see at present, there will not be any direct result. After a. protest by another shareholder about this question being raised, Mr. Markmann was allowed to proceed with his motion. The rule, he said, was far too stringent. If the society could arrange to give credit, it would materially increase the business of the stores. A shareholder: Question! Mr. Markmann : I think it would — £100 per week more. The manager of the stores knew that every day he was sweeping good money ; away from the doors because the credit!- f»yj9tein was not in vogue. Mr. J. O'Sullivait seconded the motion. There was no doubt that the cash system was the ideal 090 if it could be carried out to the general advantage of the stores, but it could not. They knew of goods being taken to a house and carted back to the stores because nobody happened to be in to receive them. He had been running the Defence Stores for twelve years now, and he had never lost a shilling yet. ,-He admitted that this was only done ia a small way, but there wafc no reason why the Civil Service Society should not take a little responsifiility. : Mr. G. "Adams, senior, attacked the proposal with authorities on co-opera-tion, and his own belief that credit was bad. "Let 7 e- -give" the - thing a twelve months' trial," lie said, amidst a round of "Hear, hears." Another shareholder said he thought the percentage of shareholders required to ba present before the rule could be altered was too large, but he thought me cash system was the best. Mr. G. Allport also supported the credit system. They were, he thought, largely beating tne air because the meeting with an attendance of 40 and only 150 proxies in could accomplish nothing that would bo legal. (There are 850 shareholders in the society, and a representation of 500 • f would therefore be required before the meeting would have been in prefer). Credit would require an expensive bookkeeping system ; and it should also' be remembered that many had gone into the society on the understanding that it was (p, be run on the cash system. If the cash system was 1 not a success, then they could try credit system. '. Mr. E Boyes supported credit Still another shareholder said the rule had buen purposely made drastic in order that the constitution 'of the society could not bt> readily altered. A supporter of democracy and its ways said he would alter the representation required at a meeting if he could, because it was not democratic, but he did not believe in 1 altering a system of trading that was already proving a success. Mr. P. Galvir' , did not see why tho meeting should- have been. called. " After a good ." deal 1 df " discussion a shareholder asked if it r would not be well to hdve the Opinion of'the manager on the question: - Mr. Allport objected to the manager speaking, and others followed in the same strain. The chairman said it was apart from the business of the meeting. As chair; man he could not give the desired information. The matter had been discussed up hill and down dale until 9.15, when a share* j holder asked by what authority the chairman had ruled that the meeting was in order to take the motion. Mr. J. Rodgers came to the rescue with the remark that no motion should be allowed to interrupt the discussion at this stage. ' „ Mr. Robieson : Dp youjintend to take a vote of the meeting?'- - The chairman : Yep. - Mr. Robieson : Then: I submit the meeting is out of order' because .you have not got authority to do bo. There is nob a quorum present.' j Mr. Markmann pointed out that a bylaw had been passed by tho committee that 40 members constituted a quorum at a general meeting. : At this stage the meeting cot out of control. A shareholder asked now many were present at the , meeting, but the chairman appeared to lie indifferent, and various attempts to get information failed. .This brought an indignant shareholder to his feet, who moved that the chairman should leave the chair in order that the information might be obtained. The motion was duly seconded j. and Mr. Allport supported it. > The secretary stated that a previous chairman (Mr. Ronaldson) had admitted that ho Ima made an error in ruling that two-thirds of the members (or their sfepre»entation) was required before there could bo a quorum at a- general meeting. The mover and seconder <of the noconfidence motion insisted ll^afc it should be put to the 'meeting notwithstanding a volley of /'Noes." • . Eight hands were held tip in support of it, and tho others present endorsed tho / actions of the ohainnan, and ho retained his control of the business. It was then announced that tho motion would be put to the meeting. With tho proxy votes voting. waß~For, 116; against) 64. . . \ Tho chairman : There are not twothirds of the shareholders 'present, therefore, the voting can have no effect. This ended the meeting.