Chapter VI: Front Matter (6)

Knitters who sell their goods to the shopkeepers have not always an account in their books; perhaps, indeed, it may be said that, in a majority of cases in Lerwick, they have not. It is different in the country. But as it may often happen that a woman who brings a fine shawl or a lot of veils for sale does not want the whole value in goods at the time, or cannot make up her mind as to the particular article she will take, a balance of the price often stands over. The merchant will not give cash, unless it has been so specially agreed beforehand, for he would thereby lose the expected profit on his goods sold; and the knitter never thinks of offering to pay a discount for money. The balance is therefore (where the knitter has not an account) marked down in some corner of the day-book, or a line or voucher is given. The latter device has been adopted to a large extent in some shops. The most perfect, and perhaps the most extensive system of lines, is that in use in the shop of Messrs. R. Sinclair & Co. at Lerwick. This firm does not wish, they say, to give out lines, but would prefer that the women should take out the value at once. They have, however, been obliged to give lines; and they keep a line-book as a check, which was produced at the examination of Mr. R. Sinclair. This he stated to be the second book of the same kind which he had used since he perfected the system. It is a register of all the lines issued at the shop, and begins at the top of the first page, thus:

LINE-BOOK

'Line-Book, March 1871.
B.H.

6 £0 2 6 £0 2 6
17 0 3 3 0 3 3
45 0 11 0 0 11 0'

And so on.

M. Sanderson, 7297; R. Sinclair, 2592; J. Sinclair, 3251; R. Linklater, 2695.]

For several pages at the beginning of the book the numbers are not consecutive; and it was explained that the unpaid notes in a previous book had been copied into this book, book, in order to avoid having to refer to two books in the course of business.

The notation employed consists of the letters of the alphabet, with a number up to 100. When the single letters were exhausted, that is, when 2600 lines were issued, the lines were marked AA 1, AA 2, and so on, up to 100; and then AB 1, AB 2, up to 100, and so on till the latest entry, which was on January 4, 1872, DA 90.

Each of the tickets (which are in this form-'CY 92-Credit bearer value in goods for 18s. R. Sinclair & Co., J.J.B. 22/12/72') is marked with the same letters and number the corresponding entry in this book. When it is returned, goods are given for its amount, or for part of it,-the payment in the latter case being sometimes marked on the line which is retained by the knitter. When the whole amount is paid the line is marked in the line-book 'Paid,' and the date of settlement is generally added, thus:

'B.H. 93 Paid 18/11/71 W.B. £0 1 6 £0 1 6 98 Paid 23/11/71 0 15 0 0 15 0'

The majority of the lines now standing in the early pages of this book are still unpaid.

Thus, on page 1, out of 29 lines from BAH 6 to BL 34 (199 lines issued within the same period having presumably been paid before this new register was begun), only 3 are remarked as paid. So, on the second page, out of 30 lines, from BL 36 to BO 24, only 4 are marked paid; and on page 3, from BO 40 to BR 57, only 3 are marked as paid.

Taking as a specimen the 74 lines issued on the first four days of December 1871, the average amount of the sums for which they are granted is 5s. 6d. the actual amounts varying from 31s. 6d. to 1s. Out of these 74, 21 lines, amounting in all to £8, 6s. 2d (and averaging 7s. 1020/21d), were paid at 4th January. It does not appear whether the extinction of the lines is always effected by taking goods to the full amount of the line, or whether part of a line is not, on the occasion of a purchase of goods, transferred to a new line, which might very readily be done.

Although Mr. Sinclair has the largest transactions in lines, they are resorted to when required by most of the merchants who buy hosiery or fancy goods.

[J. Anderson, 6709; L. Moncrieff, 11,497.]

A few other merchants employ the same system of lines and a line-book on a smaller scale; and they, too, ascribe the practice to their solicitude for the convenience of the knitters. The merchants of course have the benefit of getting their hosiery, to some extent, on credit; they have the use of the money without interest so long as it remains in their hands; and when they pay, they pay in goods on which they have a large profit.

[T. Nicholson, 35; M. Laurenson, 7299.]

SALE OR BARTER OF LINES

It is natural to suppose that documents of this kind should come to be used as a sort of currency, in a district where money is so scarce as Shetland. This custom is not so wide-spread as might have been expected; but that lines are frequently transferred by the original holder, is clearly enough proved. The merchants who issue them are chary of admitting that such transfers are made, and some even seem to think it necessary to take precautions against such a proceeding. That the practice exists appears from the evidence of Mr. Sinclair's chief shopman, who admits that he has heard a 'vague report' that the lines have been exchanged; and when asked to explain the entry 'To lines' occurring in accounts in the journal or work-book, says:

'... Sometimes the party that the account belongs to will have to pay another party so much, and she gives us instructions to mark a line for a certain amount in the book, and then give her that line to give to the other party, who comes back with it and gets the amount in goods.' '3383. Then the line is granted to your knitters for the purpose of paying their debt to another?-Yes.' '3384. Is that frequently done?-Not very often. It has happened occasionally.'

[J.J. Bruce, 3355; R. Sinclair, 2581, 2591, 3617.]

The evidence of the knitters themselves proves that the practice of selling or exchanging these lines is quite usual and well-known among the more necessitous of them, <i.e.> those who have no means of living but knitting. One respectable merchant in Lerwick gave up the practice of issuing lines, on account of the trouble and annoyance occasioned by this practice.

[E. Robertson, 248; M. Hutchison, 1592; E. Moodie, 1879; W. Johnstone, 2880; J. Henderson, 11,637, 2897; W. Johnston, 2875.]

WORK-BOOKS FOR KNITTERS EMPLOYED BY MERCHANTS

The accounts of women who knit with the merchant's wool are kept in a 'work-book.' Settlements are made from time to time, more frequently than in the case of fishermen's accounts; and the women, though they seldom have a balance in their favour, are seldom allowed to take a larger amount in goods than is owing to them for work. I examined a number of work-books, and among others that of R. Sinclair & Co., which may be taken as a specimen. Each knitter has an account current with the firm, the debit side of which contains the amount of the goods and worsted furnished, the credit side the amount of articles of hosiery returned, and the sum allowed for each. The book seems to be well enough kept, and each account bears to be balanced from time to time. No signature is attached to the balance. The entries of tea are numerous, frequently more than one parcel being given in one day. Those of cash paid are very rare; in many accounts there are none. To Catharine M'Courtenay, who has numerous dealings, amounting to above £5 in eleven months, there are three payments of cash, of 31/2d. and 3d. each, on December 1st, 9th, and 19th, 1871. Mr. Sinclair pointed out the case of Marion Sinclair and sisters (who are tenants of his own at a rent of 17s. 6d. a quarter, which is entered on the debit side of the account), as one in which cash had been paid. The amount of the account from January 16, 1871, when there is a balance against her of £1, 5s. 41/2d. is nearly £10 and the amount of cash paid is 9s. 9d., of which 1s. 3d. is entered 'Cash for dressing. On the other hand, looking through the book, I found one payment of 10s. in cash to Mrs. Irvine, Scalloway, and of 5s. to another, while one woman from Troswick is credited with a payment of 5s. in cash. Other payments in cash, on one side or the other, occur, but they are rare and of small amount.

[A. Laurenson, 2216; R. Sinclair, 2378, 2462; R. Anderson, 3069.]

PASS-BOOKS

Sometimes, but not in the majority of cases, knitters have pass-books. The neglect to have them is no doubt due to the same reluctance to undertake unnecessary trouble on the one side, and carelessness or trustfulness on the other side, which make pass-books so rare among fishermen.

[R. Sinclair, 2383, 2455; B. Johnston, 385; Janet Exter, 4099; E. Robertson, 232; see above p. 24. (fishermen).; Mrs. Nicholson, 3504; M. Jamieson, 14,045.]

The tone in which the knitters themselves speak of the custom of the trade varies considerably. In general, they declare their decided preference for payment in cash; and many came forward voluntarily to complain of the present custom. Some have felt it for years back to be a grievance, and have been in the habit of complaining of it to those from whom they could look for sympathy or assistance; while all try to sell their productions for money rather than goods, if they can get as high a nominal price. They manage to sell many articles to strangers who visit the country in summer, to ladies who have made a practice of getting them sold to friends from charitable motives, and to women in Lerwick who act as agents for merchants in the south.

[C. Winwick, 53; J. Irvine, 82; M. Hutchison, 1564; M. Clunas.]

It is stated that there are two prices for knitted articles, a price in goods and a cash price; but the impression among many of the people is, that it is better to take the high price in goods than the lower price in money This is described by Mr Sinclair:

'2609. Have you ever stated to the knitters, who were coming to sell to you, that they had better take ready money and take less of it?-I have. It would save us a very great deal of bother if they would do so.' '2610. What have they said to that proposal?- They have never entered heartily into it. There was a case I may refer to, not of women employed to knit for us, but of women from whom we bought shawls over the counter, which corroborates what I have already said on that subject. I cannot now recall the names of the parties, but I would know their faces at once.' '2611. Were they women from Dunrossness?-Yes. Three girls came into my shop, each of them having a shawl to sell, worth £1. At that time the noise had come up about cash payments, and I said to them, "Now, what would you take for these in money? I am not saying that I will give you money, but what would you take for them in money?" One of them said, "I ken you will just be going to give us money." I said "Why? Don't you think the goods you get cost us money?" She said, "I ken that fine. I will give my 20s. shawl for 18s. 6d." I said, "I could not give her 18s. 6d. for it, and asked her if she would take 17s." She said, "No," and that it would be most unconscionable to take 3s. off the price of a shawl. I said, "I don't think it, because when I sell the shawl again, I can only get 20s. for it, and then there is a discount of 5 per cent. taken off." '2612. I suppose that bit of trading came to nothing: they did not take money?-No; they did not take money; but another one said, "I would not sell my shawl for 18s. 6d. or 19s. either, for I see a plaid in your shop that I want for my shawl; and what good would it do me to sell you the shawl for 17s., and then take 3s. out of my pocket to pay you in addition, when you are willing to give me the plaid in exchange for the shawl?" That was her answer to me.'

[A. Laurenson, 2168; R. Sinclair, 2397; R. Linklater, 2726; H. Linklater, 2920 (contra).]

Mr. Morgan Laurenson says:

'7306. In that case, is a lower price given in cash than would have been given in goods?-Yes, because in ordinary transactions I have a profit only on the goods sold. I may state, however, that the women are unwilling to take cash. I remember that on one occasion, when I was changing from one place of business to another, I had no goods, and I offered the knitters cash for their hosiery, at such a price as would give me a reasonable profit, but they objected to take it. For instance, in the case of gentlemen's undershirts, the usual price given may be from 4s. to 4s. 6d. I have offered to give them in the one case 3s. 8d., and in the other 4s. in cash, but they have invariably refused. They would rather leave it, and get such goods as they wanted, than take a lower price in cash; and that has got to be the rule. They are very fond of getting the highest nominal value; and I can show from my books that, as a rule, I give the full price for each article which we charge in selling them, and have only a profit on the goods we give in exchange.'

Some knitters say that the price is low enough, even if it were paid in cash, and conclude, perhaps illogically, that they are therefore better to take the goods.

[Joan Ogilvy, 9752; M. Jamieson, 14,052.]

SALE OF GOODS GOT FOR KNITTING

With many women money is a necessity for payment of rent, purchase of provisions, and other purposes. Cotton goods, tea, and shoes, which are almost the only things they can get for their knitting, are not enough to keep life in them. Those who depend entirely on their own labour have therefore to find some other means of providing themselves with these necessaries; and it is chiefly by them that the complaints of the present system are made. Some work out-of-doors for part of the year, <e.g.> in fish-curing or farm-work. In many cases they have sold the goods obtained at the shop, or bartered them with neighbours, for potatoes or meal. This practice cannot be described as universal, because the greater number of knitters live with parents, or have some supplementary occupation by which they get money. But still the practice is proved to have been so common that the ignorance which many witnesses profess with regard to its existence is surprising. Tea especially is a sort of currency with which knitters obtain supplies of provisions. Even if there were not direct testimony to this effect, it would be a fair inference from the large quantities of tea which the pass-books and merchants' books show that they get. Thus, in one account, more than a half of the total amount consists of 1/4lb. packages of tea.

[J. Irvine, 120; B. Johnston, 401; M. Clunas, 3466; R. Henderson, 1295; M. Jamieson, 14,053; Dr Cowie, 14,709; J. Coutts, 15,336; R. Irvine, 15,748; M. Quin, 16,657; C. Sutherland, 16,660; C. Borthwick, 1627; 1645; Mrs. Nicholson, 3516; Mary Coutts, 11,601, Agnes Tait, 11,758; E. Russell, 11,583; E. Moncrieff, 11,474; Janet Exter, 4112; C. Nicholson, 11,997; M. Tulloch, 1487; Jane Sandison, 4151; A. Johnstone, 4226; R. Sinclair, 2436; J. Anderson, 6696; C. Greig, 11,559; M. Jamieson, 14,058; I. Henderson, 11,656, 11,663.

Cotton and drapery goods are also sold or exchanged by knitters in order to get provisions or wool, and sometimes at a considerable loss. Thus Isabella Henderson says she had to give goods which cost 6s. 6d. for 5s. worth of meal. Women at Scalloway stated that they had frequently hawked the goods given them for knitting through the country for meal and potatoes. Mary Coutts says:

'11,601. How do you get your provisions, such as meal and potatoes?-We give tea to the farmers, and get meal and potatoes for it. We have sometimes to go to the west side, to Walls and Sandness, for that. Our aunt, Elizabeth Coutts, has done that for us. She has not been to Walls and Sandness for the last two years, but she went regularly before. It was only for our own house, not for other people, that she took the tea there and got the meal and potatoes in exchange.' '11,602. During the last two years how have you got your meal and provisions?-We have knitted for Mr. Moncrieff last year.' '11,603. And therefore you did not need to barter your tea?-No.' '11,604. Did you get the full price for your tea from the armers?-I suppose we did sometimes, but I could not say. They did not weigh out the meal and potatoes which they gave in exchange; they merely gave a little for the tea which my aunt gave them. I have known her go as far as Papa Stour, twenty-four miles away, to make these exchanges. That was where most of her friends were.' '11,605. Have you often had to barter your goods for less than they were worth?-Sometimes, if there had been 21/2 yards of cotton lying and a peck of meal came in, we would give it for the meal. The cotton would be worth 6d. a yard, or 15d.; and the meal would be worth 1s. I remember doing that about three years ago; but we frequently sold the goods for less than they had cost us in Lerwick.'

MERCHANT'S PROFIT ON HOSIERY

One of the peculiarities of the hosiery trade, as described in the evidence of the merchants, is that they have no profit on the hosiery and fancy articles, which they invoice to merchants in the south at prices either the same as the prices paid for them in goods, or so little higher as only to cover the risk and loss upon damaged articles and job lots. They say that the only exception to this is in the case of fine fancy work, which is often bought for cash, and in selling which they can readily obtain a sufficient profit. There is a good deal of evidence about this which rather tends to show that although dealers in Shetland invoice their goods to trade purchasers in London, Edinburgh, and elsewhere, at such prices as are, upon the whole of their sales, sufficient to keep them free from loss and allow a profit, yet that profit is very small, being at most a small commission for the trouble of getting the goods disposed of; and that they have a much less, but still considerable, trade with private purchasers, in which they realize considerable profit. The inquiry into traders' profits was not prosecuted in a more searching way, by examining themselves and their knitters at length upon invoices and specimens of goods, because the sufficiently intrusive inquiry which was made, and which stands in various parts of the printed evidence, seemed clearly enough to show that the truth as to this collateral question is as I have stated it.

[A. Laurenson, 2199, 2264; R. Sinclair, 2525, 3246, etc.; R. Linklater, 2728; J. Tulloch, 2795, etc.; W. Johnston, 2844; T. Nicholson, 3584; M. Laurenson, 7517.]

MERCHANTS PRICES FOR GOODS

But while the merchants assert that they have no direct profit upon their sales of knitted goods, or at least none but the smallest, they do not deny that, in order to repay themselves for the trouble and risk involved in the two transactions upon which this profit is realized, they charge considerably more for their tea and drapery goods than the ordinary retail price in other districts. In other words, although there is nominally no profit upon the knitted goods, there is a double profit, or a very large profit, on the drapery goods, tea, etc., bartered for it. If, therefore, we calculate what the price of these goods should be at the ordinary retail rate, and deduct the surplus from the nominal price of the knitted articles, we find that the usual percentage of profit is obtained on the latter as well as on the tea and drapery.

TWO PRICES FOR GOODS

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]

SHETLAND YARN

The trade in the raw material of the knitting trade presents some features of interest. Some women stated that they could not get worsted from the merchants in exchange for their work-wool and worsted being called by them 'money articles.' Further inquiry showed that this was uniformly true only with regard to the true Shetland yarn, which the shopkeepers can with great difficulty get in sufficient quantity for their own purposes and for which, even if they could keep it for sale, the people would give only the price for which they can get it from their neighbours, <i.e.> the same price at which the shopkeepers have bought it. Even when sold for money, it is given as a favour, or, at least, the transaction is out of the usual course. But even the Yorkshire or Scotch yarn cannot always be got from the shops in exchange for knitted work. Of course, both kinds are given out to knitters working on the employment of the merchant. Shetland yarn and wool may be bought occasionally in small quantities at the shops of grocers and provision-dealers, who have got it from country people in exchange for meal and goods.

[J. Irvine, 115; C. Williamson, 152; C. Petrie, 1423, 1430; B. Johnston, 449; A. Laurenson, 2288; R. Sinclair, 2465; R. Anderson, 3179; W. Johnston, 2897; J. Tulloch, 2781; R. Linklater, 2752, 2765; A. Laurenson, 2304; Mrs Nicholson, 3530.]

The merchants, who give out both kinds of worsted to be knitted for them, generally purchase only articles made of real Shetland wool.

[C. Greig, 11,551.]

SPINNING.

In the country, the knitters or the older women in their families commonly spin their own wool; or if, as in Lerwick and Scalloway is generally the case, they have not sheep, they spin wool bought from neighbours or at the shops just mentioned, and knit the yarn so manufactured. For instance, a witness says that she barters tea or a parcel of goods for a small quantity of wool, which she spins herself, having no money to buy worsted-money article-or to put the wool to the spinner because that would require money too; or at times she may get a little wool in exchange for a days work, 'but it is not often we can get that.'

[C. Greig, 11,532, 11,547; E. Russell, 11,572; M. Coutts, 11,617; Joan Fordyce, 16,049; P.M. Sandison, 5192; M. Jamieson, 14,053; G.C. Petrie, 1425.]

Exceedingly high prices are sometimes given for the finest qualities of Shetland worsted. It is sold by the cut, which is nominally 100 threads. The weight of the worsted is of course less in proportion to the fineness of its quality, and 7d. per cut being where the price of the finest quality, which is rare, the price per lb. reaches £4, or even £7. Ordinary yarn for fancy work is 3d. to 4d. per cut, or 24s. to 40s. per lb.

[A. Sandison, 10,186.]

GENERAL OBSERVATIONS.

As I have not had the advantage of considering, in conjunction with a colleague, the questions suggested by the facts now detailed, I do not make definite and detailed recommendations. These are indeed questions of policy, which it is for a Government rather than a Commissioner to decide. But the duty committed to me will not be discharged without an attempt to show what is the general result of the inquiry, what are the questions presenting themselves, and how these questions are viewed by some of the witnesses who have intimate personal concern with them.

MODES IN WHICH WAGES ARE PAID

The system of barter which has been described does not extend to any trades or handicrafts in which wages are paid to the workmen or workwomen, with three exceptions, viz.: (1) the knitters who knit the merchants' yarn; (2) the persons employed in curing fish, boatbuilding, and some miscellaneous employments connected for the most part with fishing; and (3) the kelp-gatherers. The days' wages also of fishermen occasionally employed by proprietors or merchants in agricultural work are sometimes carried into their accounts. If it be assumed that legislation for the prevention of truck is expedient, there can be little difficulty in applying to these three classes any Act of Parliament that may be passed for that end. And on the same assumption, there is as much reason for protecting the persons engaged in these trades from being compelled, by their own misfortune, weakness, or improvidence, to take payment of their wages, or part of them, in goods, as for giving such protection to workmen in other parts of the empire.

APPLICATION OF STATUTES

It has already been mentioned that one branch of the knitting of Shetland goods probably falls under the existing Truck Act, 1 and 2 Will. iv. c. 37. It rather seems, however, that such knitting will not be one of the trades to which the bill now before Parliament applies. It seems also doubtful whether the application clause of the bill will extend, as it now stands, to all the branches of fish-curing, or to the manufacture of kelp. See 33 and 34 Vict. c. 62, sch. 2; 34 and 35 Vict. c. 4.

BARTER OF EGGS ETC.

It will hardly be contended that in the system of bartering eggs or butter for goods, which prevails in Shetland, delivery being made on both sides at the time when the bargain is made, and the transaction being thus finished at once,-there are evils similar to those which legislation against truck is intended to remedy, or at least that the law ought to prevent buyers and sellers in such cases from making any contracts they please. This custom, which was or is not uncommon in other remote rural districts, will probably disappear of itself as the islands are brought into more frequent and intimate relations with the rest of the world.

BARTER OF KNITTED ARTICLES

The same might be said with regard to the barter of knitted articles for tea and drapery, where the knitter is in no sense employed or engaged to manufacture the raw material provided by the merchant. Here, however, the element of credit or accounting is often introduced; and it is a question whether, so far as it is so, this handicraft ought not to be ruled by the same considerations as the fishing trade. The evils arising from long accounts in this trade and in fishing seem to point to the necessity of extending to these cases the prohibition of set-off contained in §5 of the existing Act and in §10 of the Bill now before Parliament. Another uggestion is, that a short prescription for such accounts should be introduced-say a prescription of three months, running from the date of the earliest item in the account, and accompanied by a provision that no acknowledgment shall bar prescription unless it be contained in a holograph or probative writing.

CASES IN WHICH LABOUR IS PAID BY A SHARE OF THE PROFITS

In the ling fishing the fisherman may be regarded, if we speak technically, as a vendor to the merchant. Practically he is a partner, for the price of his wet fish is in proportion to the proceeds of the merchant's sales of the cured fish. In the Faroe fishing the fisherman is more distinctly and formally a partner, for the agreement signed by the merchant and the crew entitles him to a share of one-half of the net proceeds of the fishing. The question to be answered is, whether the principle of the Truck Acts extends to these two occupations, so as to justify the State in laying down such rules as shall prevent the fisherman in either case from taking part of his earnings, although they are not wages, otherwise than in current coin; and if that be so, what practical difficulties stand in the way of applying the principle. It is difficult to read the evidence without arriving at the conclusion, that if it is right to protect the skilled artisans of Sheffield and Birmingham, and the highly paid miners of Lanarkshire and South Wales, from receiving their wages in goods, it is also right to require the fish-curer of Shetland to give money instead of goods to his fishermen. By whatever name we may call the earnings of the latter, there is not such a difference in the positions of the two classes as to justify us in applying to them different rules of law. Both are labouring men; for the Shetlander's possession of a small allotment of third-rate land does not elevate above the condition of a peasant.

If we apply to the Shetlander the legal distinctions which occur in the existing law, he differs but little from some of the protected crafts in England. He engages to fish the curer, and to give him the produce of his labour at the current price, just as a collier contracts to put out coal at a certain rate per ton. If the law is to protect from truck the man who agrees to be paid not directly for his labour, but for the result of his labour, the Shetland ling fisher may be held to fall within that principle. There is, indeed, this distinction, that his remuneration depends on the price eventually obtained for the produce of his labour, so that he takes the risk of the market. The amount of his earnings is affected both by his success in catching fish and by the fluctuations of the market. The collier, on the other hand, works for wages fixed at a certain rate, and the only element of uncertainty is the quantity of his out-put. The fisherman certainly works upon the co-operative principle at present; and in considering any legislative change, it may be desirable to avoid interfering with this principle of the present system, and unintentionally leading to the substitution of fixed wages.

ARGUMENTS AGAINST LEGISLATIVE INTERFERENCE TO ENFORCE SHORT PAYMENTS

It is maintained on various grounds that the provisions suggested for the prevention of truck in other trades cannot be advantageously applied to fishing. Most of the merchants are averse to short pays, and I cannot say that the fishermen themselves are in general desirous to have them introduced. I endeavoured to ascertain from the witnesses examined whether there is any insuperable obstacle to the introduction of ready-money payments for fish.

The objections may be reduced, to two classes:-

SHORT PAYMENTS 'IMPRACTICABLE'.

1. That payment of the fish on delivery would be 'impracticable;' which is explained to mean, (1) that it would necessitate the employment of more highly paid factors at the stations, and the conveyance of considerable sums of money for distances of many miles, there being no banks in Shetland except at Lerwick; and (2) that the settlement with the men would take up a long time and detain them from the prosecution of the fishing, which, during the summer months, requires incessant activity.

On the other hand, it may be said that every cargo of fish is now received at the station by a factor employed by the curer, who weighs the fish and enters the weight of each kind in his fish-book. If the price of the fish were fixed, there could be no difficulty in ascertaining the money share of each man in a particular haul, or in the catch of a week or a fortnight, as is done in Fife and in some of the Wick fisheries; and the factor might either pay it in cash or give an order, which the fisherman or one of his family could cash at the merchant's counting-house. If the price were left to be fixed at the end of the season, the law might require payment of a proportion of the estimated price, as it does now in the case of the Northern whale fishery.

The argument, that the settlement would take up an intolerable time, and prevent crews from getting to sea in favourable weather, is sometimes fortified by the assertion that the people of Shetland are singularly defective in arithmetic. Even if we assume this statement to be correct, there is so little intricacy in a calculation of the price of 18 cwt. of fish at 6s. 6d. per cwt., and dividing the sum among five or six men, that a very low arithmetical faculty would not be severely taxed in checking it. There is little doubt that in stating this objection, which scarcely deserves refutation, the simple settlement at landing a cargo of fish, or at paying cash for a week's fishing, is confounded with the very different kind of settlement to which the witnesses are accustomed at present, and in which all the transactions of a year in fish, cattle, meal, tea, clothing, soap, fishing lines, and a hundred other things, have to be gone over in detail, and checked generally, on one side at least, from memory.

SHORT PAYS 'NOT ADVANTAGEOUS TO FISHERMEN'

2. It is maintained that a system of short payments in cash would not be advantageous to the fishermen, because, in the first place, their improvident habits would lead them to spend their receipts at once, so that at the end of the year they would have nothing left with which to pay their rents, and no means of living in the spring, when the meal from their crofts is exhausted; and, in the second place, because it is inconsistent with their being paid according to the price actually realized for the fish, which is commonly higher than the 'beach price' during the season, or the market price at the time when agreements for the summer fishing are made.

The first of these reasons is felt and stated by some of the fishermen themselves. But are Shetland fishermen more improvident than other people similarly situated would be? Under the present system of credit transactions, indeed, it would be strange if a part of them were not careless and extravagant, and it would not be strange if a great majority were hopelessly improvident and insolvent. No man is more likely to waste his means than he who never knows how much he has to spend; and this general truth is not likely to fail in its application to men following a precarious calling in which there are great runs of luck, and who have been brought up from their earliest years to expect their employers to supply their pressing wants in times of adversity. But the objectors themselves assert, and there is no reason to doubt, that a very considerable proportion of the people have saved money in spite of the influences under which they live, and have, for their rank in life, large deposits in the banks. If many of them are careless and improvident, that is a reason, not for continuing, but for altering a system which is admirably conceived for promoting extravagance and recklessness about money. If some Shetlanders are improvident, it is the system which has made them so; and if it be a fact that so many have saved money, it proves that under a better system the people of Shetland would compare favourably with those of any other district in frugality and foresight. If the fisherman had his money in his hand, it is not likely that he would forget rent day and the time of short supplies which he has often to pass through in spring.

[R. Halcrow, 4700; R. Malcolmson, 4781; P.M. Sandison, 5227; G. Gilbertson, 9578; J. Hay, 5375; P. Blanch, 8565; C. Young, 5815, 5918.]

It is said that in bad years, when the crops or the fishing, or both, have failed, the population would starve in winter and spring if the merchants were not to make advances of meal and provisions; and that they could not do this, but for the security afforded by having the men engaged to fish to them for a price to be settled only at a distant day. Even if supplies of food are not required, men may be unable to go to the fishing for want of boats, lines, and hooks, which they have to get from the curer, and which, it is contended, may properly form a first charge against the proceeds of the enterprise. Fishing is always most productive when the men are paid by shares, not by wages; and it is not desirable to introduce any change which would necessitate the payment of the men by wages.

[W. Irvine, 3896; T. Gifford, 8150; H. Hughson, 9599; W. Irvine, 3834; A. Sandison, 10,007; L.F.U. Garriock, 12,605.]

It may be replied, that however true this may be, it just presents one of those cases in which the weaker party is likely to be led into a disadvantageous bargain, and in which, upon recognised principles, the law may interfere for his protection, by regulating the bargain so made, or by teaching him how to escape from the position of disadvantage. The transition to a new state of things might in bad seasons be attended with some difficulties and hardships, especially to those who are now indebted. Thus Mr. A. Sandison, in recommending a system of monthly payments, says, 'I think it would pauperize a number of the fishermen, because there are a great number of them in debt, and in the transition from the one system to the other they would require to pay up their debts, so far as their means would go' (Q. 10,015).* One cannot avoid observing that this class of objectors to cash payments exaggerate both the inability of the people to provide against the evil future, and the value of the 'merchants' as a source of credit in bad times. It is impossible to judge of the energy that would be exerted under the stimulus of necessity by a population which has always had landlords, tacksmen, and merchants to depend on in adversity. Those who urge that the men could not live, or at least could not go to fish, unless the merchants were there to supply their wants, forget that, while the existing system presents one ready source of credit to fishermen, it closes up all others. The fish-merchants, by getting delivery of their debtors' fish, have such a security for their accounts, that other shopkeepers do not now venture to furnish any but the smallest quantity of goods to the average fisherman on credit. But if there was some certainty that the fish-merchant had not a contra account against the fisherman, at least equal to the price of his fish, other merchants would not have the same reason, in cases of necessity, for refusing to give some credit to deserving men. This is shown by the fact-certainly an exceptional one-that a most successful business has been established in Dunrossness by Mr. Gavin Henderson, in a district where the tenants are strictly bound, and that he has been in the habit of giving credit to considerable amounts to fishermen bound to other merchants. And other cases of credit sales by others than the fish-merchant are recorded. The extension of credit dealings with smaller shopkeepers is, however, strongly deprecated by Mr. Spence and Mr. Sandison, partners of the firm of Spence & Co. It is enough to remark, that such credits would be subject to the ordinary rules of the law; and that if they were found to be injurious, it would for the Legislature to consider whether the rule of the Arrestment of Wages (Scotland) Act 1871, or a short prescription, should not be extended to them.

*'10,016. Do you think the fishermen under that new system would not be able to get credit to a certain extent?-I don't see how some of them could. For instance, take the year 1869. In 1868 the fishings were almost a failure. Our total catch in Unst and Yell amounted to £1607, which could not average much over £4, 10s. to each fisherman. That year we imported meal and flour to the amount of £1824, cost price per invoice; we paid in cash for rents to Major Cameron, Mr. Edmonstone, Lord Zetland, and others, £1600; and we expended on fishing-boats and fish-curing materials £780,-being a gross amount of outlay of £4223 against the fishing, the return for which, as said, was only £1607.'

[R. Henderson, 12,855; M. Laurenson, 7342; D. Edmonstone, 10,658; J. Thomson, 11,711; L. Moncrieff, 11,518; G. Georgeson, 12,032, 12,118; J. Twatt, 12,186; J. Spence, 10,559; A. Sandison, p. 248, f.n. 10, 494.]

It may be contended that a law which would restrict the freedom of fishermen to contract for payment in proportion to the profits realized on their fish, would be inexpedient; but it is not impossible to frame an enactment which, leaving them this power, should require payment, weekly or monthly, of such a proportion of their earnings as would obviate the necessity of living on credit.

OPINION OF MR SANDISON IN FAVOUR OF SHORT PAYMENTS

It is satisfactory to find one of the most enterprising and intelligent merchants in Shetland stating a strong opinion in favour of a system of monthly payments for fish. Mr. Sandison's evidence on this subject, with which the other members of his firm agree is as follows:-