4 i6 



POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



on under different managements. 

 It enables capital to gain such gen- 

 erous rewards that it can command 

 executive talents of a far higher or- 

 der than those content with the 

 profits of a small concern. As a 

 consequence, its management is the 

 most efficient that is to say, the 

 most economical. Obeying still fur- 

 ther the law of evolution, the several 

 departments also fall into the most 

 efficient hands. The subordinates 

 are likewise intrusted with the par- 

 ticular duties they are best fitted for. 

 Thus, from top to bottom, there is 

 an adaptation of means to ends far 

 beyond the reach of an establish- 

 ment where the management is of a 

 low order of ability and the subor- 

 dinates unite in their duties a variety 

 of functions. A further gain is had 

 from saving in rents, and from the 

 purchase of goods in large quanti- 

 ties. Besides economy in prices, so 

 important to the multitude of con- 

 sumers, whose welfare the "new" 

 social reformer seldom considers, 

 there is economy in time and effort. 

 The department store enables them 

 to obtain what they want with a 

 minimum of movement. 



In absolute ignorance of the na- 

 ture and achievements of the immu- 

 table law that has called the depart- 

 ment store into existence, the " new " 

 social reformer has begun to wrestle, 

 as already stated, with the u problem " 

 it presents. He has begun to repeat 

 the follies that every inventor from 

 Arkwright down has had to face. 

 To be sure, no department store has 

 been sacked or burned ; but the legis- 

 lation proposed as a u remedy " has 

 virtually the same object in view, 

 namely, the destruction of an impor- 

 tant labor-saving device. But, most 

 happily, it presents difficulties to its 

 enemies that a mere machine does 

 not offer. Not long ago, when a 

 number of them met in Chicago to 

 propose a solution of the " problem," 



they could not, as might have been 

 foreseen, agree upon the limit to 

 put upon the kinds of goods the de- 

 partment store should sell. Hardly 

 had the druggist vented his griev- 

 ance and suggested the rigid exclu- 

 sion of his goods before the tobac- 

 conist arose to protest against the 

 incursion of the druggist into his 

 domain. The grocer filed a like 

 complaint against the butcher, who 

 sells vegetables as well as meat. It 

 was discovered also that the butcher 

 trespassed upon the fishmonger and 

 the oyster dealer. In selling beer 

 and liquor, the grocer was guilty of 

 a similar offense against the saloon 

 keeper. Equally culpable was the 

 tobacconist who sold papers and um- 

 brellas ; the shoe dealer who sold 

 trunks and valises; the bookseller 

 who dealt in candy and stationery; 

 and the milliner who sold corsets 

 and toilet articles. In fact, the meet- 

 ing contained hardly a protestant 

 that did not deal in one or more 

 articles outside of his specialty, and 

 thus present the same " serious prob- 

 lem " that the department store does. 

 Naturally, it broke up without having 

 reached a decision as to how the 

 " problem " should be solved. 



Although the same insuperable 

 difficulties confront the " new " so- 

 cial reformer and are not unlike- 

 ly to prevent him from getting the 

 legislation so generally regarded as 

 the solvent of most troubles, the 

 " problem " of the department store 

 is not insoluble. That is to say, a 

 limit upon its scope is not impossible 

 nor improbable. But the limit will 

 not be drawn by the u wise legisla- 

 tor," but by the law of evolution 

 itself. There is reason to believe 

 that the small store, devoted to spe- 

 cial lines of goods, will not succumb 

 altogether. Of certain staple goods 

 and of all goods of a medium or in- 

 ferior quality, the department store 

 will doubtless retain the monopoly. 



