To illustrate: the Carnegie Steel Co. and the Illinois Steel Co., a subsidiary of the Federal Steel Co., had widely separated plants, and, because of the important item of freight rates, sold for the most part in different territories. But the two companies competed in a middle ground and each had succeeded in encroaching on the other’s natural territory, in some instances had attached to itself certain customers therein. To retain these customers each company was compelled to sell in a locality adjacent to the other’s mill at the same price as its competitor was willing to offer. The Carnegie company, for instance, might have achieved the custom of a railroad whose Eastern terminus was Chicago. To supply the orders of this road it would have to pay freight tariffs from its mills near Pittsburgh and deliver the goods to the road at Chicago at the same quotation the Illinois company was naming for deliveries from its mills in the very suburbs of Chicago. It is extremely doubtful if such a situation was really advantageous to either company in the long run. It is certain that its continuance would have been distinctly disadvantageous to the Corporation that owned the stock of both concerns; it simply meant that the Corporation would have to pay freight for carrying steel hundreds of miles when it was able to deliver it from a mill practically at the customer’s door. The officers of each company were naturally unwilling to hand over custom they had built up by years of effort to a concern long regarded as a competitor. Even from the standpoint of the then-existing conditions each must have felt that it was his job to make a good showing for the company he managed; he had no concern elsewhere. But, for the good of the whole organization, it was absolutely necessary that these officers should be brought to realize that they were working first of all for the United States Steel Corporation, that inter-company jealousies must be buried for the common good and the interests of the party made subservient to the welfare of the state. And the way to do this was to make the interests of the Corporation, the controlled company, and the individual worker identical. Andrew Carnegie had built up the greatest steel company of its time by appealing to the loyalty of his men through self-interest. Like Napoleon’s soldiers, each man under him carried a potential marshal’s baton in his knapsack. The Napoleon of Steel held dangling before the eyes of his subordinates the hope of a partnership in the great Carnegie company as a reward for meritorious service, and most of his later partners won their way upward from the ranks. And the scheme worked out by the Corporation’s management to bring about the desired harmony, to assure loyalty to the United States Steel Corporation first and last, was modelled to some extent on Carnegie’s method. It became known as the Stock Subscription and Profit-Sharing Plan.