The daily Nome industrial worker., 1916-09-18
AN INDIGNANT MARKHAM.

ticiZing some few remarks in this paper some time ago was received for publications:
 Nome, Alaska, Sept. 13, 1916. To the Editor Nome Industrial
 Worker.
 This letter is prompted by .an ar ticle which appeared in your paper issue Aug. IS, said article being reply to a criticism I believe was in the Nome Industrial Worker, to wit: That it is not the socially ap- piled labor that gives commodity value, but ownership. If that is correct-I did not read the first ar ticle-I certainly want to take issue with you, MT. Editor as to that statement, as it is on the correctness that it is the socially necessary labor which gives and adds value to commodity that Marxian Socialism stands or falls. Iu connection with this it is important to remember that Carl Marx and Frederick En- gels are the founders of Scintilic Socialism, and in "Capital', by Carl Marx is laid bare the Law of Value, and in no place as far as l know does Marx admit that it is owner ship that gives value to commo- dity. You, MT Editor are not the first one who has tried to upset the Marxian theory of value. Of late years there has been numerous per sons who have tried it-amons whom we find the late Prof. o. D. Skelton, P. D. D, Sir John A. Mcdonald, Professor of Political Science, Queens University, King ston, Canada, who in his 300 page book, Socialism, Critical Ana lysis', a hook that took the S1,OOO prize offered by the firm of Hart, Shaffner and Marx of Chicago for the best essay against socialism, tried to refute the Marxian theory of value and who was put to rout by the grand old warrier for the emancipation of the working class, the late Daniel DeLeon, Editor Of the Weekly People, S. L. F., and will quote a paragraph from the first article written by DeLeon in contradiction of Prof. Skelton book, Socialism, Critical Analysis in the Weekly People, April 27, 1912, which states briefly the Law on Value as enunciated by Marx as follows: "The value, exchange value of commodities is determined by the amount of socially necessary labor power for production crystall- ized in them. Actual exchange does not always take place by that stand ard, the perturbation of the market due mainly to varying supply ana demand one time sends the price up above other times sends it down below the value. Value is the cen ter towards which cuhrent prices gravitate. Hence value and prices are different things, though they may and periodically, in the long run, do coincide"
 The illustration you give-if the air was owned that that would give it value-can not be called falr Illustration of how your theory or what gives value to a commodity .is drawn. In the first place, you are giving us a hypothetical illustra- tion; nothing is proven by suppos ing and letting it go at that. want you, MT. Editor, to give us some authority for your statement as to ownership gives value and not the socially necessary labor to com modity. In controversies affe.tihs Socialism. the student of the Science of Socialism must have. yes. insist on having, facts and authority, and that you have failed to give.
 In closing I will quote an example of how the socially necessary labor gives value to commodity. IL IS a letter written by comrade in San Francisco to the present editor of the Weekly People which takes up and very neatly exposes capital istic superficiality on this-"Marx- ian theory of value"-and whica again establishes the correctness of the Marxian theory and the con founding of your, MT. Editors theo- ry that it is ownership that gives