Page 326 - The_story_of_the_C._W._S._The_jubilee_history_of_the_cooperative_wholesale_society,_limited._1863-1913_(IA_storyofcwsjubill00redf) (1)_Neat

The Story of the C.W.S.

conditions of sale, and could not be sanctioned by the associated
manufacturers. " Not long ago," replied Mr. Tweddell, speaking
to a meeting of Northern societies' buyers, " it was the boast of
private traders that goods were overcharged to pay dividends; now
it is admitted that dividend is a reduction in price." Now the
dividend on purchases, the consumers' saving, ma}' be paid to
individuals or used collectively, but under some form or other it is as
proper to a consumers' movement as better wages are to a successful
trade union movement; indeed, it is more so, being a certainty of
effective combination, and if it were not paid equitably to the
purchasers and used by them in common, it could only be paid
inequitably to capital in the manner of some earty and unsuccessful
societies of about 1830. Hence to any demand for the withholding
of dividend there could be only one reply. And, emboldened by the
possession of the Pelaw Drug Works, the C.W.S. answered the
ultimatum by a counter-movement. When some of the associated
manufacturers refused supplies the Pelaw works undertook to make
up or provide C.W.S. preparations; and accounts were closed with
the manufacturers concerned.
This bold course produced one, but only one, legal action. There
is a patent medicine known as Iron-Ox Tablets. The name
suggests some combination of beef extract and steel tonic, but
the preparation was described in court as " a laxative pill." In
place of this the Pelaw works had obtained from a manufacturing
druggist and packed a "Compound Iron-Oxide Tablet." The
proprietors of Iron-Ox took action to obtain an mjunction, and the
case was heard in the Chancery Court before ]\Ir. Justice Parker on
May 7th and 8th, 1907. The defence was that a demand existed
for iron-oxide as a drug, and the name of " Iron-Oxide " enabled
these tablets to meet the demand; moreover, private chemists gave
evidence for the defence that other iron-oxide tablets were largely
sold. The plaintiffs met this by stating that their pill contained
no iron-oxide at all, " Iron-Ox " being an invented name. The}'
produced proof that between May, 1902, and March, 1907, £88,430
had been spent in advertising their manufacture, and the selling
of " Iron-Oxide Tablets " was harmful to them. In giving judgment
on May 9th the Judge took the view that the public in asking for
" Iron-Ox " did not expect to receive any form of iron-oxide.
And, considering the name " Iron-Oxide Tablets " to have been
chosen for competitive rather than descriptive purposes, he granted
an injunction, although " having regard to the fact that 'iron-oxide
256