60 SOCIAL SCIENTIST namely C-M-C5 and M-C-M9 respectively. We found that unlike C-M-C where the objective is use"value(consumption),in M-C-M'the objective is a quantitative increase of the same form of value, money. The M-C-M5 circuit accordingly is ^logically limitless", and the CMP inherently dynamic and self-expanding. We found also that while capital first presents itself historically as merchant and moneylending capital, these forms would not suffice for the self-expansion of value (denoted by the increase of M'over M)to occur on a social scale. The dominant form of the /LP circuit of capital for the CMP is productive capital M—C—P——G'—M'. \MP Here the capitalist buys labour-power and means of production, obtains a new commodity of greater value, by the selling of which the self-expansion of value (M' over M) is effected. To investigate the process of self-expansion of value at a theoretical level, we set aside the disturbing influences of supply and demand as well as the possibilities of nonequivalent exchange through ^buying cheap and selling dear" for the time being. We also pointed out that these secondary phenomena only redistribute the total value and do not add or create new value. Thus, assuming commodities to be exchanged at their values, we examined the source of surplus value (M'-M). We came to the conclusion that it was to be found in the commodity labour-power ^whose use-value possesses the peculiar property of being a source of value, whose actual consumption, therefore, is itself an embodiment of labour, and consequently, a creation of value."18 We illustrated the argument with the example of a ten-hour working day, the value of labour-power being six hours. The value of labour-power, it was noted, included a ^historical and moral element" unlike in the case of other commodities. As a very minimum, however, it had to be sufficient for the physiological reproduction of the worker. It must be stated clearly that the value of labour-power, like all other concepts in Marx, refers to a social average. It must be interpreted so as to include the reproduction of the working class, that is, the workers and their families. We then went on to examine the historical preconditions for the existence of capital. The capital-wage labour relation was seen as the historical product of a long series of economic forms, each of which was transitory and thus superseded. The development of a class of people owning nothing but their labour-power on the one hand, and of a class of people owning (monopolizing) the means of production and money on the other (liquid wealth) were seen to be the preconditions. Later on, we may have the opportunity to go further into this aspect of the problem. In conclusion, we must point out that the process of production of surplus value has not yet been examined. We shall do this next. Here^ we have only pointed, by means of a logical argument, to the origin of surplus value. When we examine the process of production of surplus