Page 99 - The_story_of_the_C._W._S._The_jubilee_history_of_the_cooperative_wholesale_society,_limited._1863-1913_(IA_storyofcwsjubill00redf) (1)_Neat

Independent or Departmental.
opposed. The Wholesale, it was said, should not move, for other
action was being taken. And very shortly the Central Board
invited representatives of the Wholesale Society and the Industrial
Bank to meet them at Barnsley on September 13th, and consider
certain resolutions, prepared by Messrs. Hughes, Crabtree, and
Rutherford, and unanimously recommended by the Board for
adoption. The casting vote of their chairman brought the C.W.S.
representatives to the meeting. They found themselves asked to
join in separating the banking business from the federation, and
amalgamating it with the Industrial Bank in a new and independent
organisation. J. T. W. Mitchell and Robert AUen, of Oldham, for
the Wholesale Society, at once dissented, while Abraham Greenwood,
appealed to by Hughes, as chairman, for his opinions, defended the
methods and security of his department, and protested against an
agitation which " kept everybody in suspense."
Since this attempt at separation came to nothing we need not
follow its details further. Incidentally it kept ahve the question of
the legahty of the C.W.S. banking business. At the Society's
Quarterly Meetings Mr. Hughes, M.P., would say it certainly was
illegal, while Mr. Walter Morrison, M.P., would not be certain at all.
At any rate, as Hughes showed, " the statute attached no penalty
whatever to the breach of the law," and the C.W.S. Committee
grew more resolute in standing by a department which proved of
steadily- increasing value to the federated stores. At the same time
they showed no unfriendliness toward the Industrial Bank. As
early as August 10th, 1872, the Newcastle Sub-Committee had
recommended that the Industrial should be the agent of the
Wholesale in the North. A week later the Manchester Committee
declared themselves " extremely anxious not to do the sUghtest
damage or injury " to the northern institution. They sought to take
no advantage of Ludlow's repudiation, nor to use his argument
against the joint-stock company. And when, in 1876, the Industrial
failed disastrously, ^ the Newcastle Committee (as it was then) were
"
able to state oificiaUy that in no way can any action of either the
general board or of the branch committee here be deemed to be the
cause of the failure of the Industrial Bank."
The opposite may be said, that instead of in any way attempting to injure
either the Ousebum Engine Works or the Industrial Bank, we have on more
than one occasion made advances to these institutions of many thousands of
pounds, when no other bank or individual could be foimd to render assistance
in any form whatever.
> Seo Chapter XIII.
69