readily pay it and not be so ready to rebel. This idea sparked even more debate. Lord Grenville, along with other members of parliament "[could] not understand the difference between external and internal taxes. They [were] the same in effect and [differed] only in name" [15]. William Pitt answered Lord Grenville in a debate on that very same day. He said that there was definitely a difference between the two, and that if Lord Grenville could not see the difference on his own, then he could not help him [16]. Pitt went on to say that "If [he] could have endured to have been carried in [his] sick bed . . . [he would] have borne [his] testimony against [the Stamp Act]" [17]. It was said later that "if Pitt had been in his place . . . the disasterous policy of taxing the colonies could not have been carried . . ." to the point of actually becoming a law [18]. Pitt did not agree with the Stamp Act, and he even applauded the colonists for refusing to pay it, but he did "[maintain] that the Parliament [had] the right to bind [and] to restrain America" [19]. It is important to remember that he did not think Parliament could not tax the colonies, just that Parliament should not tax them. While Pitt and Grenville were in disagreement over the Stamp Act in Parliament, governing officials in the colonies who had been charged with seeing that this law was carried out were being harassed to the point of being tarred and feathered by the rebels in some areas [20]. Others had been threatened with the destruction of their homes. The Stamp Act was doomed from the start. There was not a royal official in the colonies who was actually going to enforce this particular act. The Stamp Act was repealed before it even went into enforcement. Grenville was again devastated by the failure of his plan to make the colonists pay for their protection. He began to worry about the outright refusal of the rebels to pay their taxes. He even said the he "[doubted] that th...
