Letting off steam over city kitchen

Observer accused of misleading readers

Whingeing by the Observer about the cost of Stirling’s communal kitchen prompted a row with one of the ladies who ran it.

Stirling Town Council placed a question mark over the future of the kitchen which was set up in early 1918 in the British Women’s Temperance Association rooms in the former Corn Exchange Tavern.

The aim of the kitchen was to help conserve food and fuel and it proved a success, plating up 5455 servings of soup, meat and pudding in March, 1918, for a clientele of mostly “working people”.

Receipts for that period were £52 17shillings and fivepence, while expenditure was £40 11 shillings and threepence.

However, in May 1918, the ladies who ran the kitchen said it would be impossible to continue the initiative unless they had more space and certain “labour-saving devices” – namely a potato scraper and cleaner, potato steamer, gas cooker and sink.

It was estimated that the cost to the council of equipment and changes to provide extra space would be £145, almost £8000 to day.

But town councillors rejected the request for money claiming the communal kitchen was threatening the livelihoods of Stirling restaurants. In an editorial, the Observer acknowledged there had been “agitation” over the decision but dismissed it as misguided.

The paper said the kitchen saved its patrons money but asked why the community should subsidise it.

“If economy in food and cooking was effected, nobody would dispute the benefit,” said the Observer. “But the question naturally arises why should those who reap the advantage bear the cost.”

There was praise for the ladies who ran the kitchen, giving their time for free, before the paper added: “It was never a paying affair from a business point of view but ought to have been so as those it served are quite able to pay a fair price for the meals they got from it “

The Observer was of the view that had the kitchen been run on conventional business lines, it would not have had to seek a subsidy from the council.

Defending the kitchen in a subsequent letter to the paper, Margaret Murray, The Shieling, Stirling, accused the paper of misleading readers and being unacquainted with the way the kitchen was run.

She added: “The main idea of the communal kitchen is that the food cooked should be carried out to the household, and thus save much fuel and time in individual cooking,

“If you know of other establishments in Stirling which fulfil a similar function and at a moderate rate will serve large quantities of soup and potatoes to be consumed off the premises, you will do the community a great service by printing a list of such establishments and obviate any need for a communal kitchen.

“It was this branch of work with which it was impossible to cope in the present restricted premises and the demand for soup and potatoes to be carried out was many times greater than could be supplied.”

Mr Murray said their prices were fixed by “those in authority” and she was of the view that using such cheap items of food and working in restricted premises made it impossible to make a large profit.