ey [bordered] on open rebellion . . . [and feared] they would loose that name to take that of a revolution [21]. In his disappointment at the failure of both of his plans, Grenville had no way of knowing how true his words would ring in just a few years. davisxx.htmdavisxx.htmdavis03.htmdavis03.htmdavis05.htmdavis05.htm4/5The Townshend Acts of 1767Lord Grenville lost the seat of Prime Minister in 1765, but it was not because his plans to get American colonists to pay their taxes had failed. It was more due to the fact that most men agreed with King George III, who had once mentioned (along with the thought that Grenville was an "insufferable bore") that "he would rather have the Devil as a visitor of Buckingham Palace than to be forced to listen to George Grenville" [22]. Grenville did, however, remain in Parliament and voted to tax the colonies every chance he had. The Sugar Act and the Stamp Act had failed to gain revenue from the American colonists, but men were still in Parliament devising plans of how the Americans would be convinced to pay. William Pitt had a plan to get Parliament to forget about the colonists' refusal to pay taxes to them for the time being by introducing a new idea involving "The East India Company [whom] . . . British military forces had supported. . . . [William Pitt, the earl of] Chatham . . . proposed that the company should pay an annual rental to the government and that the dividend policy of the East India Company should be regulated by the government to prevent speculation in the company's stocks. [Furthermore], revenues from the East India Company could have made up the national deficit and averted the taxation issues with the American colonies"[23] . This bill, however, was refused. The bold refusal of the American colonists was a slap in the face for Parliament, and it was far from forgotten. A plan to repay the debt was not enough. Parliament wanted a plan that would convince the colonists to pay th...
