Karl Marx was, of course, not the inventor of Socialism, nor was he, so far as I know, the originator of any of its fundamental doctrines, — the doctrine, for example, that all value is derived from Labor was part of mediaeval clericism, — but be first reduced it to coherent form and published it as a complete and definite system, and upon the issues, substantially as he formulated and left them, must Socialism stand or fall.

I must assume the members of the Ruskin Club to be familiar with the Marxian fundamental propositions, which I do not state because I shall confine my attack to the three derived propositions about which discussion mainly centers.  We certainly do not want an exercise in serious dialectics after dinner, but I will say in passing that I do not think that any of his fundamental propositions are true, or that his theory of value has a single sound leg to stand on, and as for what he calls “surplus value,” I doubt whether there be such a thing.  At any rate he has not proved it, nor can it be proved, without taking into consideration the enormous number of industrial failures, as well as the more limited number of industrial successes — and there are no data for that purpose.  I may also mention as what seems to me a fatal flaw in Socialistic philosophy, its concentration upon the conditions of Industrial Society, without adequate conception of a provision for the requirements of agriculture.  Industrialism and commercialism are doubtless conveniences essential to our present civilization; but if every factory and all commerce were blotted from the earth the world would go right along, and when the necessary millions had perished in the adjustment, those remaining would be as happy as ever.  Mankind adjusts itself to new environments very readily.  We here in cities talking wisely on these things are wholly unnecessary.  The farmer is essential, because without him we should starve.  Nobody else is essential.  We must not get the big-head.  Economical farming on Socialistic methods is impossible, and any successful system of Social betterment must be based on the requirements of economical farming.  Finally, to conclude this preliminary reconnaissance, the attitude of Socialism to religion is wholly unjustifiable.  I am profoundly convinced that the groveling heathen, who in sincerity bows down to a “bloomin’ idol made of mud,” as Kipling puts it, has in him the propagation of a nobler and happier posterity than the most cultured cosmopolitan who is destitute of reverence.  The Church and the Synagogue are the only existing institutions of modern Society which are engaged in the work of upbuilding and strengthening that rugged personal character which is the only sure foundation of any worthy civilization.

I do not discuss the fundamental Marxian propositions for two reasons.  In the first place, it would be laborious beyond measure for me, and dreary beyond measure for you.  For example, the bottom stone in the foundation of the sub-basement of the Marxian edifice is the proposition that the equation