Plain Truth (1776)
James Chalmers
It now behooves us well to consider, whether it were better to enter the harbour of peace with Great Britain, or plunge the ship into all the horrors of war.--Of civil war. As peace and a happy extension of commerce, are objects infinitely better for Great Britain, than war and a diminution of her commerce. It therefore is her interest grant us every species of indulgence, consistent with our constitutional dependence, should war continue, there can be no doubt of annihilation of our ships, ports, and commerce, by Great Britain. . . .
If my remarks are founded on truth, it results, that the time hath not found us; that independency is inexpedient, ruinous, and impracticable, and that reconciliation with Great Britain on good terms, is our sole resource. 'Tis alone will render us respectable, it is this alone, will render us numerous; it is this only, will make us happy. . . .
Released from foreign war, we would probably be plunged into all the misery of anarchy and intestine war. Can we suppose that the people of the south, would submit to having the seat of Empire at Philadelphia, or New England; or that they people oppressed by a change of government, contrasting their misery with their former happy state would not invite Britain to reassume the sovereignty.
-Chalmers and others opposed to war believed that Britain's advantages over the colonists included

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

Chalmers believed that if war continued, Great Britain's military strength and control over commerce would ultimately lead to the "annihilation of our ships, ports, and commerce." Therefore, he argued that reconciliation with Great Britain on good terms was the only viable option for the colonies. This implies that Britain had military and commercial advantages over the colonists.

Plain Truth (1776) James Chalmers