A.D. 1689
—1776.
to show
what was
hurtful.
Tke effort
bo render
trade sub-
servient to
industry
led to
B53 PARLIAMENTARY COLBERTISM
the day was able to show conclusively that the apparent
injury wrought to English industry by the French trade
was either illusory, or was indirectly compensated. From
this distance of time we can see that there were cases, when
the sacrifice of colonial trade to the supposed interests of
the realm was detrimental to the manufactures which Parlia-
ment was most eager to encourage’. But the indirect effects
of trade are not easily analysed or exhibited; even Adam
Smith could do little more than point out that any gain,
which arose from the mercantilist protection of industry,
was purchased at an absurdly dear rate.
The simmering discontent which had been felt since the
time of Cromwell?, in regard to the rapidly increasing im-
portations of manufactured goods from France®, gave rise to
a vigorous agitation after 1667, when Colbert revised the
French tariffs, and imposed prohibitory rates on English
sloth. A document was prepared by Houblon, Papillon
md other leading London merchants, which put forward
statistical data for asserting that England was a loser by
nearly a million (£965,128. 17s. 4d.) a year, in her trade
with Frances. The opposition party in Parliament took up
the matter eagerly in the following session; but it was nob
bill 1678° that they were successful in carrying a bill for the
prohibition of French trade. The contest was renewed when
James II. came to the throne®, as the prohibition was re-
moved and a heavy tariff was imposed instead ; but at the
Revolution the Whigs reverted to the policy of prohibiting
the French trade’ as hurtful. In spite of the large amount
| The Molasses Act, by hampering the New Englanders in their trade, tended to re-
quce their ability to purchase manufactures. Ashley, Surveys, 330. Seebelow, p. 482.
2 There are some signs of making common cause with France in the colonial
policy of Charles I. (see above, p. 856), but the combined economic and political
jealousy of France which was so strongly felt by the Whigs seems to have been
aroused by the commercial policy which was pursued by Cromwell and maintained
by Charles II. The large imports from France were beneficial to the revenue;
and both the Protector and King Charles IT. preferred a policy which placed money
in the hands of the executive. This was an important element in the curious
process of the formation of parties at the Restoration; the Court, rather than the
Country party, were following on the lines 1aid down during the Interregnum.
s Ashley, Surveys, 272. 4 Parl. Hist. App. CXv.
599 and 30 C. IL. ¢c. 1, § 70. 6 1 James II. cc. 6, 7. Ashley, op. cit. 282.
I 1W. and M. e. 34. An Act for Prohibiting all Trade and Commerce with
