Porter，1849，and by P.J.Stirling，1873)，in which he exhibited his best qualities of mind.Though Cairnes goes too far incomparing this work with the Lettres Provinciales ，it is certainly marked by much liveliness，point，and vigour.But toexpose the absurdities of the ordinary protectionism was no difficult task；it is only in such a form as the policy assumed inthe scheme of List，as purely provisional and preparatory，that it deserves and demands consideration.After the revolutionof 1848，which for a time put an end to the free-trade movement in France，the efforts of Bastiat were directed against thesocialists.Besides several minor pieces possessing the same sort of merit as the Sophismes ，he produced，with a view to thiscontroversy，his most ambitious as well as characteristic work，the Harmonies ?conomiques (Eng.trans.by P.J.Stirling，1860).Only the first volume was published；it appeared in 1850，and its author died in the same year.Since then the notesand sketches which he had prepared s materials towards the production of the second volume have been given to the publicin the collected edition of his writings (by Paillottet，with Life by Fontenay，7vols.)，and we can thus gather what wouldhave been the spirit and substance of the later portions of the book.
It will always be historically interesting as the last incarnation of thoroughgoing economic optimism.This optimism，recurring to its first origin，sets out from theological considerations，and Bastiat is commended by his English translator fortreating political economy "in connection with final causes."The spirit of the work is to represent "all principles，all motives，all springs of action，all interests，as co-operating towards a grand final result which humanity will never reach，but to whichit will always increasingly tend，namely，the indefinite approximation of all classes towards a level，which steadily rises，inother words，the equalisation of individuals in the general amelioration."What claimed to be novel and peculiar in his scheme was principally his theory of value.Insisting on the idea that value doesnot denote anything inherent in the objects to which it is attributed，he endeavoured to show that it never signifies anythingbut the ratio of two "services.''This view he develops with great variety and felicity of illustration.Only the mutual servicesof human beings，according to him，possess-value and can claim a retribution；the assistance given by nature to the work ofproduction is always purely gratuitous，and never enters into price.Economic progress，as，for example，the improvementand larger use of machinery，tends perpetually to transfer more and more of the elements of utility from the domain ofproperty，and therefore of value，into that of community，or of universal and unpurchased enjoyment.It will be observed thatthis theory is substantially identical with Carey's，which had been earlier propounded；and the latter author in so many wordsalleges it to have been taken from him without acknowledgment.It has not perhaps been sufficiently attended to that verysimilar views are found in Dunoyer，of whose work Bastiat spoke as exercising a powerful influence on "the restoration ofthe science，"and whom Fontenay，the biographer of Bastiat，tells us he recognised as one of his masters，Charles Comte (69)being the other.
The mode which has just been explained of conceiving industrial action and industrial progress is interesting and instructiveso far as it is really applicable，but it was unduly generalised.Cairnes has well pointed out that Bastiat's theoretic soundnesswas injuriously affected by his habit of studying doctrines with a direct view to contemporary social and politicalcontroversies.He was thus predisposed to accept views which appeared to lend a sanction to legitimate and valuableinstitutions，and to reject those which seemed to him to lead to dangerous consequences.His constant aim is，as he himselfexpressed it，to "break the weapons "of anti-social reasoners "in their hands，"and this preoccupation interferes with thesingle-minded effort towards the attainment of scientific truth.The creation or adoption of his theory of value was inspiredby the wish to meet the socialistic criticism of property in land；for the exigencies of this controversy it was desirable to beable to show that nothing is ever paid for except personal effort.His view of rent was，therefore，so to speak，f ore-ordained，though it may have been suggested，as indeed the editor of his posthumous fragments admits by the writings ofCarey.He held，with the American author，that rent is purely the reward of the pains and expenditure of the landlord or hispredecessors in the process of converting the natural soil into a farm by clearing，draining，fencing，and the other species ofpermanent improvements.(70)He thus gets rid of the (so-called)Ricardian doctrine，which was accepted by the socialists，andby them used for the purpose of assailing the institution of landed property，or，at least，of supporting a claim ofcompensation to the community for the appropriation of the land by the concession of the "right to labour."As Cairnes hassaid，(71)"what Bastiat did was this：having been at infinite pains to exclude gratuitous gifts of nature from the possibleelements of value，and pointedly identified"[rather，associated]"the phenomenon with `human effort'as its exclusive source，he designates human effort by the term `service，'and then employs this term to admit as sources of value those verygratuitous natural gifts the exclusion of which in this capacity constituted the essence of his doctrine."The justice of thiscriticism will be apparent to any one who considers the way in which Bastiat treats the question of the value of a diamond.
