past, its framework embraces the present, and its lofty tower pierces the future.
Marx's socialism is neither the result solely of his hatred of the oppressors and love for the oppressed of the present social system, nor is it the dream-like construction of his fervid imagination; it is the logical conclusion of his reading of the past and his understanding of the present of our civilization. It is equally absurd to say, with Prof. Seligman, that Marx's interpretation of history has nothing to do with his socialism, as it is to say, with Bernstein, that it is immaterial to Marx's socialist predictions whether his theory of value be sound or not. We have seen the correctness of Marx's interpretation of history; we have seen the correctness and the precision of his analysis of the workings of the capitalist system; and we have seen, above all, the irresistible manner in which his socialist conclusions flow from those premises, and the absolute necessity of those premises for his socialist conclusions. We have seen, in fine, what a great light the contemplation of the whole sheds upon each and every part thereof. But even should the reader disagree with us on that, he surely cannot deny the justice of our claim that he can accept the Marxian system as a whole or leave it as a whole, but he cannot take part of it, and leave the rest, and above all he cannot take the conclusions without admitting the premises.
