Sure. And there isn't a trace of irony or sarcasm in this passage from Ch. 7, Sec. 1 of _Capital_:
========== The capitalist paid to the labourer a value of 3 shillings, and the labourer gave him back an exact equivalent in the value of 3 shillings, added by him to the cotton: he gave him value for value. Our friend [the capitalist], up to this time so purse-proud, suddenly assumes the modest demeanour of his own workman, and exclaims: "Have I myself not worked? Have I not performed the labour of superintendence and of overlooking the spinner? And does not this labour, too, create value?" His overlooker and his manager try to hide their smiles. Meanwhile, after a hearty laugh, he re-assumes his usual mien. Though he chanted to us the whole creed of the economists, in reality, he says, he would not give a brass farthing for it. He leaves this and all such like subterfuges and juggling tricks to the professors of Political Economy, who are paid for it. He himself is a practical man; and though he does not always consider what he says outside his business, yet in his business he knows what he is about. ==========
By Carrol Cox's straight-faced reading, the words of the capitalist and his men should be taken at face value, and therefore no such thing as surplus value would exist.
I could go into this more, but I have a cake in the oven, and no more time to reply.
Curtiss