586 PARLIAMENTARY COLBERTISM 
A.D, 1689 the field. When at length the French power was broken 
"at Quebec, the colonists felt that they could hold their own 
»n an enormous continent; it was inconceivable that they 
should look again to anyone but themselves for protection 
against a foe. Hence the authority of the Mother Country 
was entirely sapped; it could only have been permanently 
maintained by a constant exercise of wisdom on the part of 
the Government at home, and by the highest tact on the 
part of its representatives in America. It was not from 
grievances caused by economic dependence, bub from the 
economic strength of the colonies, that the desire to sever 
their connection arose’, and it may be doubted whether 
any concessions in the way of Parliamentary representation 
would have rendered them content to remain in a condition 
»f political dependence, for all time. 
The economic treatment of the colonists by the Mother 
Country doubtless gave rise to some inconvenience; we 
cannot gauge its full extent. The principles on which ib 
rested however, were not in themselves unreasonable; no 
serious statesman would have expected a country to tolerate 
hostile competition on the part of its dependencies; but the 
principles were applied to the colonies in a manner which 
rendered the action of the Mother Country irritating to 
all sections of the community. 
The enactments for Ireland had been a blow to certain 
producers, and stamped out trades that were beginning to 
qourish ; but in America, the grievance was chiefly felt by 
the consumers, who had to pay very heavily for all their 
clothes and implements. The duties which were levied on 
their raw produce and fish, after the Restoration®, put them 
to considerable straits to find goods with which to purchase 
stores; and they had begun to manufacture as well as they 
could, because of their inability to buy. Had they been 
permitted to manufacture for the local demand, they might 
possibly have acquiesced in any legislation which prevented 
vithout 
British 
wrotection. 
\ This danger had been indicated by various writers. Compare Child's 
argument in support of the thesis * that New England is the most prejudicial 
plantation to this kingdom.” New Discourse of trade (1694), p. 212. Gee, Trads 
1nd Navigation of Great Britain (1767), p. 173. 
3 Rear Commercial Policy of Enalaud. 74.