class the issues presented in the presidential campaign, and had used material from newspapers and magazines which dealt with this subject. The steel strike, in its various aspects, had also been used as the basis of discussions, and had served to introduce many economic principles.

MR. J. L. MCCASKEY, mechanical engineer, Westinghouse Electrical and Manufacturing Company, Pittsburgh, made a plea for the teaching of economics as the best possible training in citizenship. There is a strong demand for training in this subject on the part of people who do not have the opportunity to attend college. The plan was tried in the Westinghouse Company of having the workingmen participate in the management, but it was soon discovered that the delegates of the workingmen knew no economics and did not understand the problems presented. They were told that they should study this subject, but they could not be persuaded to go to the Carnegie Institute of Technology or to the University of Pittsburg or to lectures given by men in these institutions. It therefore became necessary to give instruction in economics to the men in the plant. This has been done by the construction of a large wall screen on rollers, on which were presented by means of charts and graphs and other devices the important economic facts of production, exchange, and distribution. It was found that by this method even the illiterate men in the plant were able to understand the material presented, and that all took a great interest in the course.

J. B. THOMPSON, Maryland, State College, stated that at his institution they had to teach not only business students, as was true of the University of Pennsylvania, but students from every school in the college, and that, therefore, the principles of economics must be presented from the social standpoint rather than from the business standpoint. The great difficulty which they had experienced in teaching large elementary classes was that of checking up the work and keeping the students busy. In order to do that they gave short bi-weekly tests in which a student would be asked to write for perhaps ten minutes on some one question covered by the day's assignment. He also advocated the giving out of problem questions by the lecturer, which might be dictated, for the students to answer. Written quizzes of not more than fifteen minutes were later given in which four questions of those given out were to be answered. The student would usually write not more than one sheet, which could be easily read and graded by the instructor. As to the problem method, he thought there was great difficulty in obtaining problems that were interesting to all the students.

D. T. CLARK, Williams College, spoke of the problem method of instruction. He stated that Professor Day had anticipated the chief objection to the problem or case method by saying that a systematic

treatise on economics was to be placed in the hands of the students and that they were required to consult it fully. Without some such guide the student would be apt to flounder. The subject of economics is a most important one in a democracy, as an understanding of its principles is an essential condition to good citizenship. Since many students never go to college, the subject should be taught in the high schools and even, he thought, in the grade schools. So far as the teaching of economics in college is concerned, he agreed with Professor Day that the Sophomores would understand this abstract, philosophical subject better than Freshmen. Just where the course should be placed in a student's curriculum would, however, depend upon how much time he could give to the subject. In Williams College, it was formerly given to Juniors, but in the last two or three years it had been offered as a Sophomore subject. Before he concluded, Mr. Clark said that he would like to address questions to two of the previous speakers. Of Professor Collings he wished to ask whether the aim at the University of Pennsylvania was to study business from the social standpoint. He agreed with Mr. McCaskey that economics should be taught to workingmen, but of him he wished to ask what kind of economics they taught to workingmen.

Professor Collings stated, in reply to Professor Clark's question, that at the Wharton School they taught welfare and not price economics. Since the students had four years of work in this field, however, many of the courses which they took were technical or semiprofessional.

Mr. McCaskey stated that the aim of the instruction given by the Westinghouse Company was to develop better citizens and also to acquaint the men with business conditions. He believed that knowledge of economic principles tended to the development of a higher civilization. They had found that a full explanation of the processes of production made the men understand the economic loss involved in restriction of output. He thought that the course acted as an antidote to socialism.

FRANCIS TYSON, University of Pittsburgh, said that the previous year his department had adopted at Pittsburgh a two-year plan for the teaching of elementary economics, of which the first year embraced commercial geography and economic history and the second year a course in the principles. In this way they provided the student first with a background and with a foundation of industrial facts. During the previous summer there had been a reorganization of the economics courses and at present they are experimenting with a new course. This is a gateway course called Human Progress, which gives a survey of most of the economic progress down to the present time. It was found that this course heightened the interest of the students and he

believed that it would prove a valuable introduction to the course in the principles of economics. The course was given to the Freshmen and they had found it desirable to have a so-called Director of Freshmen to hold conferences with the students for the purpose of illuminating the course. In conclusion, he hoped that a plan might be devised by which the teachers in different institutions could pool their experiences and exchange material used in conducting the courses in elementary economics.

Professor Day replied to this that he had talked of the matter of coöperative action in the way of getting out problem material or of exchanging experiences with Dean L. C. Marshall of the University of Chicago, and they agreed that the matter called for joint action. In order to assist this movement, the Journal of Political Economy planned to publish some sample case material, but he feared that such a method, desirable as it was, would not accomplish the desired purpose in a reasonable time. If such coöperative work is to be undertaken along these lines, it needs the appointment of a committee to organize it and guide it through.

Professor Ruggles stated that at the Cleveland meeting of the National Education Association a plan had been arranged by which teachers in the secondary schools can exchange classroom material. Any such plan must, however, be organized on a comprehensive scale if it is to be efficient.

THE CHAIN STORE GROCER

BY ALFRED H. BECKMANN

The well-organized Chain Store Grocer has proven an evolution in merchandising, and developed an industry which today occupies a most important place in the distribution of food products and grocery specialties for the producer or manufacturer, and to the consumer.

The purpose of the National Chain Store Grocer's Association of the United States is to assist in elevating the industry; to oppose improper methods and illegitimate practices inimical to the right conduct of business that honest and open competition may prevail; to assist in the enactment and enforcement of federal and state Pure Food laws, which in their operation shall deal justly with the rights of consumers and the trade; to foster the adoption and enforcement throughout the United States of uniform laws upon commercial subjects; and, last but not least, to make possible a low cost to the consumer.

There are less than seventy-five responsible Chain Grocery Store organizations, operating not over fifty thousand chain stores, in the United States. There are some so-called buying exchanges and coöperative associations which in the main do not conduct their business as merchants, and tend to invite the innocent public's money without any stable foundation to produce legitimate returns. Most of these are short-lived because of their inability to function properly for the investor, for the producer or manufacturer, and to the consumer.

The development of the chain grocery industry is only in its infancy and has great possibilities under efficient and economic management, with which must necessarily be coupled proper service for the producer or manufacturer and low costs and good values to the consumer.

High-class merchandise, efficiency in service, quick turn-over and the cash and carry system, are the essential elements which tend to develop the chain grocery store industry and these elements prevail in the well-conducted chain grocery store organization.

When it is considered that the chain store grocery is of only recent origin, compared to other channels of distribution, it is not surprising that there are some interests which deplore the development and efficiency of the chain store grocer, yet when ANY avenue of distribution ceases to function economically for the producer or manufacturer and especially to the ultimate consumer, it retards its own progress and hastens the development of the other.

Chain grocery store organizations, properly conducted, perform the function of both wholesaler and retailer, though eliminating a considerable overhead expense, enabling the passing on of a low cost to the

consumer.

The chain store grocer seldom stocks many various and conflicting brands of the same food product, but concentrates his efforts on one or two brands and keeps up a free and continuous movement on them, though always mindful of the consumer's demand.

In selling to responsible chain grocery store organizations, the manufacturer eliminates a considerable overhead expense, in the cost of traveling salesmen and so-called specialty salesmen. The average quantity purchased by responsible chain grocery store organizations is usually much larger than that purchased by so-called wholesale grocers or jobbers. The buying is done at the headquarters of the chain grocery store organization, without any sales expense on the part of the manufacturer or producer. Where chain store organizations operate in different sections of the country, they usually have warehouse facilities which enable them to assemble their supplies direct from the manufacturer and redistribute to the individual stores at a lesser cost than applies otherwise, considering freight and cartage. The consumer can and does obtain a low cost through the ability of the chain store to buy direct in larger quantities. The chain store grocer turns his stock over from twelve to twenty-five times per annum, sells for cash, makes no deliveries, and the consumer is saved an average of 15 per cent in buying, due to the efficiency of the home of the chain store organization.

Values compare most favorably, in that the chain store grocer cannot prosper unless he supplies the best of what the public demands, and carries such articles as the consumer calls for. Further, some chain grocery store organizations manufacture a great many of the products which they sell. Some of the larger ones can milk, bake bread, can tomatoes, peas, etc.; manufacture flavoring extracts, cocoa and chocolate, macaroni, spaghetti and noodles; grind spices, bottle vinegar and olives, manufacture ammonia, bluing and very many other articles necessary in the home, which does not apply to so-called wholesale grocers as they would not be assured of their outlet as is a large chain grocery store organization.

That the consumer receives the benefit of low costs in buying from the chain store is proven by reason of its many units; it is able to buy car lots where the individually owned grocery can only buy in small quantities, and by the further fact that there is scarcely a chain grocery store organization making a greater net profit than 3 per cent on its sales, while the so-called retail grocers claim-and it is so contended by them that their gross margin must be 30 per cent to make any money, while the chain store grocer's average gross cost of conducting business is between 134 per cent lowest and 182 per cent highest.

The turnover in the chain store occurs much oftener than in the regular retail grocery store, therefore the goods are fresher; and the