In both cases it is not only that the constant capital of II is
 reconverted from the form of a product into the bodily form of means of
 production, in which alone it can function as capital; and likewise it is
 not only that the variable portion of the capital of I is converted into its
 money-form, and the surplus-value portion of the means of production of
 I into its consumable form, the form in which it can be used as revenue.
 It is also that the £500 of money-capital, advanced by II in the purchase
 of means of production prior to selling the corresponding compensating
 portion of the value of its constant capital – existing in the form of means
 of consumption – flow back to II; and furthermore back to I flow the £500
 which were expended anticipando by it for the purchase of articles of
 consumption. If the money advanced by II at the expense of the constant
 portion of its commodity-product, and by I at the expense of the surplus-value
 portion of its commodity-product, flows back to them, this is solely
 because the one class of capitalists throws £500 into circulation over
 and above the constant capital existing in the form of commodities in II,
 and the other class a like amount over and above the surplus-value
 existing in the form of commodities in I. In the last analysis the two
 departments have mutually paid one another in full by the exchange of
 equivalents in the shape of their respective commodities. The money
 thrown into circulation by them in excess of the values of their
 commodities, as a means of effecting the exchange of these
 commodities, returns to each one of them out of the circulation in
 proportion to the quota which each of the two had thrown into
 circulation. Neither has grown a farthing richer thereby. I possessed a
 constant capital of 2,000 in the form of articles of consumption plus
 500 in money; now it possesses 2,000 in means of production plus 500
 in money, the same as before; in the same way I possesses, as before, a
 surplus-value of 1,000 (consisting of commodities, means of production,
 now converted into a consumption-fund) plus 500 in money. The
 general conclusion is this: Of the money which the industrial capitalists
 throw into circulation to accomplish their own commodity circulation,
 whether at the expense of the constant part of the commodity-value or at
 the expense of the surplus-value existing in the commodities to the
 extent that it is laid out as revenue, as much returns into the hands of
 the respective capitalists as was advanced by them for the money-circulation.