"They were," said Norrena, "but not always. The real object of the order was to ultimately eliminate the stock corporation and substitute the equal co-partnership. Hence when incorporated, every regular customer was a stockholder to the same amount, and the stock might be paid for by turning their dividends back into the business as a permanent investment. In other words, they might pay for their stock out of what they were able to save in their cost of living by their abandonment of the profit system. And further, in order to protect themselves from the danger of a constructive indebtedness in the shape of dividend exacting stock, no certificates were issued, and the stock paid for was always redeemable in exchange certificates payable in goods at the option of the shareholders, or by order of the directors of the corporation, for failure to patronize the exchange whenever practicable. As governments were especially friendly to corporations, it was deemed best by many, to incorporate and secure these advantages." "This," I said, "was certainly the full measure of justice to be secured by a stock corporation, but how were others which were not incorporated, organized in order to secure the full measure of justice to members?" "There was," said Norrena, "no patent on the application of the Golden Rule in business, and among business men there was a large number who really wanted to see equity established in human affairs. Hence there was nothing to hinder a merchant from entering into contracts with organized consumers, to sell his business to them, and retain the management at an agreed salary, under such rules and regulations for the conduct of the business as they might adopt. By this means many were enabled to exchange a precarious profit for a permanent income. In cases of this kind, the merchant was benefited by securing a guarantee against bankruptcy and the organized consumers by securing the services of the necessary business talent to establish Equity in Distribution, by paying equal dividends out of the net income to all regular customers. As contracts for a lawful purpose were held sacred by the courts a very large number held that the contract between the customers and the manager secured greater advantages than the stock corporation in obtaining equality of dividends." "But," I asked, "why this equality of dividends? Was it fair to those who purchased large quantities of goods, to require them to share equally with those who purchased on a small scale?"