theoretical questions involved, we must call attention to the circumstance that the facts themselves are not in dispute here, but only their interpretation. Notwithstanding the apparently unanimous verdict of the critics that the Marxian theory is on this point "in direct conflict with reality" and "opposed to the facts," there is really no question here of facts, but merely of their interpretation. The phenomenon itself which, as Marx asserts, brings the Marxian law of value in harmony with the law of equal rate of profit, that is to say: the alleged fact that the products of labor in spheres of production with a higher organic composition of capital are sold at higher prices than the products of labor in spheres with a lower composition of capital, this fact itself, we say, is not disputed by the Marx-critics. It is only as to the explanation of this fact that they differ from Marx. Marx's explanation is based, in the main, on the fact, undisputed by his critics, that the same amount of labor results in a product which will be sold for a higher or lower price according to the higher or lower organic composition of capital in the sphere in which it was employed. The difference between Marx and his opponents is as to the reason for this alleged fact. Marx says the reason is that in the spheres with a higher composition of capital commodities are sold above their value and in spheres with a lower composition of capital below their value; and that the additional value included in the higher price of commodities produced in the first sphere is created in the other sphere and is transferred to their possessor by the very sale of commodities produced in the second sphere below their value. With this reasoning his critics disagree, as they undoubtedly have a right to. But they have no right whatever to hide the circumstance that it is their reasoning that is opposed to Marx and not the facts. It is a question of logic and not of fact.
Now, as to the logic of the matter. That there must have been some very poor logic used by somebody can easily be seen from the fact that all Marx-critics who agree that
