As for the temporary participation in the increase of public wealth, that is a different matter. The fact of temporary participation is explained by the theory of the economists. It is the confirmation of this theory and not its "condemnation", as M. Proudhon. If there were anything to be condemned, it would surely be the system of M. Proudhon, who would reduce the worker, as we have shown, to the minimum wage, in spite of the increase of wealth. It is only by reducing the worker to the minimum wage that he would be able to apply the true proportion of values, of "value constituted"by labor time. It is because wages, as a result of competition, oscillate now above, now below, the price of food necessary for the sustenance of the worker, that he can participate to a certain extent in the development of collective wealth, and can also perish from want. This is the whole theory of the economists who have no illusions on the subject.
After his lengthy digressions of railways, on Prometheus, and on the new society to be reconstituted on "constituted value", M. Proudhon collects himself; emotion overpowers him and he cried in fatherly tones:
"I beseech the economists to ask themselves for one moment, in the silence of their hearts -- far from the prejudices that trouble them and regardless of the employment they are engaged in or hope to obtain, of the interests they subserve, or the approbation to which they aspire, of the honors which nurse their vanity -- let them say whether before this day the principle that all labor must leave a surplus appeared to them with this chain of premises and consequences that we have revealed."[I 80]
NOTES
[1] References to quotations from works by English authors are to the edition which Marx himself used.
[2] NOTE by Engels to 1885 German edition: Ricardo, as is well known, determines the value of a commodity by the quantity of labor necessary for its production. Owing, however, to the prevailing form of exchange in every mode of production based on production of commodities, including therefore the capitalist mode of production, this value is not expressed directly in quantities of labor but in quantities of some other commodity. The value of a commodity expressed in a quantity of some other commodity (whether money or not) is termed by Ricardo its relative value.
[3] NOTE by Engels to the 1885 German edition: The thesis that the "natural", i.e., normal, price of labor power coincides with the wage minimum, i.e., with the equivalent in value of the means of subsistence absolutely indispensable for the life and procreation of the worker, was first put forward by me in Sketches for a Critique of Political Economy (Deutsch-Franzosische Jahrbucher [Franco-German Annual], Paris 1844) and in The Condition of the Working Class in England in 1844 . As seen here, Marx at that time excepted the thesis. Lassalle took it over from both of us. Although, however, in reality wages have a constant tendency to approach the minimum, the above thesis is nevertheless incorrect. The fact that labor is regularly and on the average paid below its value cannot alter its value. In Capital , Marx has put the above thesis right (Section on Buying and Selling Labor of Power) and also (Chapter 25: The General Law of Capitalist Accumulation) analyzed the circumstances which permit capitalist production to depress the price of labor power more and more below its value.
[4] In the copy Marx presented to N. Utina in 1876 after this word "labor" Marx adds "labor power"; this addition is found in the 1896 French edition.
[5] BACKGROUND NOTE: The Ten Hours'
Bill, which applied only to women and children, was passed by the British Parliament on June 8, 1847. Many manufacturers, however, ignored the law in practice.
[6] NOTE by Marx: Mr. Bray's theory, like all theories, has found supporters who have allowed themselves to be deluded by appearances. Equitable labor-exchange bazaars have been set up in London, Sheffield, Leeds and many other towns in England. These bazaars have all ended in scandalous failures after having absorbed considerable capital. The taste for them has gone for ever. You are warned, M. Proudhon!
NOTE by Engels to the 1885 German edition: It is known that Proudhon did not take this warning to heart. In 1849 he himself made an attempt with a new Exchange Bank in Paris. The bank, however, failed before it had got going properly: a court case against Proudhon had to serve to cover its collapse.
