WELLINGTON NEWS

Hokitika Guardian, 15 March 1929, Page 2

WELLINGTON NEWS

CASH ORDER TRADING. ‘ * *>'• * ' ■ r ' / , J> v ;’ ‘ • . . To The Guabdian,] ;7* ; • * 7 WELLINGTON, March 13. Many business people are decidedly opposed to the Government interfering with what is known as 'the cash order trading, and maintain that there has been nothing brought forward by the opponents of the system to warrant Government interference; furthermore it is pointed out that the Associated Chambers of Commerce, the Nineteen-Twenty-Eight Committee and numerous business men have constantly asked ifor less Government interference in business and commercial affairs and are therefore somewhat amazed at a section of the distributors wanting the Government to prohibit a certain system of trading which is held to be quite legitimate and supplying the a very large section of the community who in the main are unable to pay cash down for many needful things, principally. wearing apparel. . An official report of the proceedings held in Wellington recently by the Minister for Industries and Commerce, who inquired privately into the subject, has been published, and it is ob-> vious from this that Mr ; T. 0. Bishop was appointed to act. for those whoare opposed to this form of trading. He appears to have made a lengthy and considered statement,-but as one business man put "it ‘'j’ou can shoot peas through the fabric of his argument.” In the-course- of his statement Mr Bishop remarked that “if the system caught on, as it has in two or three centres in New Zealand and in most parts df Australia* and Great Britain, it is only a matter of time in all trades in that particular line of business will be compelled to adopt the system v irt ■ self, . defence:” '.lt - may reasonably be asked why'has the.system caught, on in Australia and Britain and some centres In New Zealand? Is the popularity of the system not due to the fact that it is sound social economics, and that being so, it cannot be disputed, would the Government be justified”in having-that system of trading declared illegal by act of Parliament? Mr Bisbop contends that ..if one or tnb.mdopt the system others are compelled suit. .01- see their, business gradually :laying /. them an going to their.;rivals.' ; ; .- This argument'is rather fanciful than accurate, for another ■ witness dealing largely in drapery stated that after 14 years’ experience fyis firm had definitely decided-on a policjr to discontinue the practice, and there is rip reason why other firm&rwb.o aKj-pgposed to the system should the cash orders. • , . • The cdsh order sy&temist]ust;a variation of the. instalment plan, and while it seems to'be quite right to buy motor cars, wireless sets, gramophones, and other more or less luxuries on the instalment plan it is extravagant and thriftless of the poor-man to of clothes on the time-payment system. The argument is hot sound. Those who execute the. cash orders are obliged to allow a discount, and this appears to be a sore point,'and the loss of customers suffered by those who refuse the orders. The question of the amount of discount i» a matter for the trader to decide, and whether he engages m the cash order business is also a matter for him to decide and the Government should not be asked to decide the matter for him. Mr Bishop is reported to have said: “The purchasing power of the people is limited—cash order tru - ing cannot possibly increase it. me community has a certain amount of money to spend, which amount is divided among the traders m accordance ' with custom, and all traders mast adopt a new method 'of trade and ah go together, the same distribution of trade will remain ; no firm will be the gainer.” If that is so why prevent the new system of trade? Some firms do not Want to do the Cash order trading; because they ca not afford the discount with their present overhead and prime charges and s ns not to lose any portion of their trade they desire the Government to put a stop to the cash order system. It is the opinio.: of some people that this system will in the long run eliminate the incompetent and unintelligent traders, while others will be, forced to make a very olose ■their 0 ■■'■■■■■ - ■-■ ■ tjVit ill V« reduce costs” 3 \ ,li u ‘ i-nd nerbapa he is observe •• •• r,f trading is “* . manciple: on not vu ••••*• i ; - • * , ~1,4 trader is otmgeri to neveP« the head of a well-known drapery house told the had definitely decided ago not to accept the order, a n open to any other trader to takeV . The system film* the same attitude. n» 7 * social need. In Australia m 1925 J he l were ten cash order companies with * r„ov» of ■were seventy,., vuth - 4*l n 000 000. arc. tw<^^ des , ** ■*•*]£*l the people wtj.o use the OTi W system seems jo lie the stronger. ■