[Letter] Nov.4,1887,Smith College [to F.H. Giddings]

Nov. 4, 1887, Smith College.

Dear Mr. Giddings,
        I think it would
be well to alternate the
articles in the book,
unless the logical order of
topics requires a change.
I do not now see that
it does so. The present
arrangement will give you
the last word in the
book, and me the first.
That is about even I
should any, and is a rather
symmetrical arrangement.
 I think some of McV's early points are
excellent. When I used
to criticise the Walker
theory with Amherst students
I relied considerably on
(1) the fact that greatest
fortunes are often made
by illegitimate exchange
than by production (Wall St.).
(2) the fact that ability
does not of itself attract
capital - one must have enough to afford security.
(3) that the talk about
advancing and retiring
margin of cultivation was
pretty generally confused.
McVane has a sledgehammer
style, and fairly improves
in effectiveness in destructive
criticism on his teacher
W. G. Sumner. I do not know
who he is unless he is the
junior instructor at Yale.
I heard that they had a
fourth man. The article
is so Sumneresque as to
vouch for the author as a
Yale man. As you infer
I do not agree with the
received Wage Fund doctrine, and
wholly object to your
classifying your own
former statement in that
category. McV's is a far
different view, and seems
to me to be pretty crude
notwithstanding its very
taking quality. Now if you
were in my place would you
append a note to my article
referring to McV's and saying that
the better part of it was answered
in N. Englander for May 1883 in
an article of mine? I intend to
make an effort to state the whole
matter as it appears to me in the
essay on Capital. Does it seem to you
to be best to wait for that? It will
give me great pleasure to meet Mr. Hotchikiss
at your house as kindly proposed. I write
to Ginn & Co. this A.M.

                  Yours Very Truly,
                        J.B. Clark