In some places, indeed, there are two prices for goods,
according as they are paid for with hosiery or with money; and
formerly this was the custom in Lerwick. Mr. R. Sinclair says:
'2574. Then I understand you to say that in every bargain with a
knitter, and generally with a seller, of a shawl, the understanding
is that they are to take the price in goods?-Yes; that has been so
time out of mind. I remember a time, about forty years ago, when
it was different, and when there were two prices on the goods
which they sold.'
'2575. There were two prices then-one for cash, and the other for
goods?-Yes; perhaps from 20 to 30 per cent. of difference. I
remember hearing that question discussed at my father's fire when
I was a mere youth. I have been told, although I do not know it
myself, because I was not in the trade then, that a woman may
have bought a piece of goods for 16d., when a party paying cash
for it only paid 1s. The more intelligent of the natives thought that
was an iniquitous thing; but then it was always known and done
avowedly, and the people yielded to it. They said it was not
possible for them to take barter, and sell their goods at the same
rate, because there was so much risk and outlay. That reason
never appeared satisfactory to me; and it was not until I came
behind the scenes, as it were, that I saw the reason for it was that
the value given for Shetland goods was far beyond what it really
was worth in the market. Its real value in the market was about
the same amount less than what was charged as an addition upon
the goods. What I mean is, that, supposing a woman came in with
a pair of stockings, the real market price of which was 2s., but for
which she wished 2s. 6d., the merchant, in order to secure a sale
for his goods, would give her goods in exchange of the nominal
value of 2s. 6d., but he would put 3d. a yard on the price of the
goods which he gave in exchange. That explains how it is that
a person knowing the value of the articles, seeing the purchase
which the woman might have made, and hearing the price of it,
might have said that they were about 25 per cent. too high,
whereas in reality they were not so. She had merely been getting
value for her goods, although she did not know it; and it would
not have made any difference, although it had been as many
pounds higher, while the relative proportions were kept up
between the value of the two articles.'
'2576. Is that done now?-Not that I know of.'
A discount for cash is still given there by some (or all?) of the
merchants; but it has not been shown, nor I think alleged, with
regard to Lerwick, that the principal merchants now avowedly
sell their goods at different prices for cash and for hosiery. There
are, however, passages in their evidence which create a strong
impression that the custom described by Mr. Sinclair as a thing of
the past is not yet entirely obsolete, even in the capital. Thus Mr.
Sinclair himself has now two drapery shops in Lerwick, in one of
which no hosiery is bought at all, all the dealings being for cash.
He admits that in some things, <e.g.> calicoes, there is 'a very
small shade of difference' between the prices there and in his other
shop, which is his principal one. Mr. Johnstone's reason for
ceasing to issue lines was simply that people used to come to his
shop and bargain for articles as for cash, and end by presenting one
of his 'lines' in payment, which would not have been felt as a
grievance if the principle of having only one price were rigidly
adhered to. The evidence as to the general prices at the shops
which take in knitted articles also leads to the conclusion that,
although articles are nominally for sale at one price, a purchaser
for cash often succeeds in getting a reduction if she is a shrewd
bargainer. The shopkeeper classifies some articles as 'money
articles,' which is a convenient reason for not giving them in
exchange for hosiery; and the impression seemed to exist in the
minds of some keen purchasers examined as witnesses, that goods
are sometimes rather rapidly transferred into that category, when it
is unexpectedly discovered, after the negotiations have reached a
certain point, that the intention is to pay for them otherwise than in
cash.
[T. Nicholson, 3586; R. Sinclair, 3229; W. Johnstone, 2280; Mrs.
Nicholson, 3510; L. Leslie, 5093.]
In the rural districts, the custom of selling goods at two prices,
according as the payment is in money, or in knitted articles or
yarn, still prevails. By Messrs. Pole, Hoseason, & Co., it has been
given up quite lately.
[P. Blanch, 8578; G. Scollay, 8639; J. S. Houston, 9715; Rev. J.
Fraser, 8039.]
There is no doubt that the general prices of tea and drapery
goods are higher where hosiery is dealt in. It may be that a cash
purchaser gets a reduction occasionally, or always if it is asked for.
But there is a general concurrence of testimony to the effect that
goods got by knitters at the hosiery shops are dearer than at other
shops in Shetland. Various merchants admit that a higher profit
is charged, in consequence of the custom of paying in hosiery.
Two respectable shopkeepers in the country say that the goods
which knitters have bartered at their shops for provisions were
said to have been got at higher nominal prices than those charged
for the same things by them. And various witnesses state, as the
result of their experience, that prices at hosiery shops are higher
than at others, and that they would get more goods for cash at the
ready-money shops than for the same nominal amount in hosiery,
where that is rather bought. Mrs. Nicholson, a very intelligent
witness, says:
'3509. Are there drapery shops now in Lerwick that do not deal in
hosiery?-Yes.'
'3510. And is it the case that you can purchase the same goods at
those shops at a lower price than you can at shops where the
hosiery business is carried on?-Yes; I know that from experience,
because I have the money in my hand, and I can go and purchase
them cheaper elsewhere than I can do at some of these shops. I
don't say at them all; but I know there are some of the drapery
shops in Lerwick where they could be got cheaper. I will give a
case of that. Last summer I had to buy a woollen shirt, and I went
into a shop and saw a piece that I thought would do. The merchant
brought it down and said it was 1s. 8d. a yard. Another merchant
had charged me 1s. 6d. for something of the same kind, and I told
this merchant that the thing was too dear. He said, "I will give it
to you for 1s. 6d. a yard;" and I said, "Well, I will give you 4s. 6d.
for 31/4 yards of it;" and he gave it me. A day or two afterwards a
woman came into my house and saw the goods, and said, "That is
the same as I have bought; what did you pay for that?" I said I had
paid money,-because it is an understanding that some shops can
give it for less with money than with hosiery. I told her I paid 4s.
6d. for 31/4 yards; and she then told me that she had paid 2s. of
hosiery for a yard of it-6s. for 3, or 6s. 6d. for 31/4 yards-just the
quantity required.'
'3511. Have you any objection to give me the name of the woman
and the names of the shops?-I could give the names, but I would
prefer to do so privately. The stuff I bought is still in existence,
and also what she bought, and they could be compared, to show
that they are of the same quality. I did not do that with any
intention of finding out the difference in prices; it just occurred
accidentally, and I only give it as an instance, to prove that if we
could get money for our hosiery goods it would be far better for
us."
[A. Laurenson, 2206, 2245; W. Johnston, 2869; Contra-R.
Sinclair, 2523 sq.; C. Nicholson, 12,004; R. Henderson, 12,916;
A. Johnstone, 4215; J. Halcrow, 4174 sqq.]
The evidence of Mr. Morgan Laurenson, quoted above, may
be referred to. Mr. Laurenson says he gets no profit on hosiery,
except the profit on the goods he gets in exchange. What the
amount of that profit is, has been shown in dealing of prices.
[above p. 35]