The rioting an boycotting were harming British trade.
The colonists were angry because of the famous line "no taxation without representation." Britain kept passing acts and the colonists had no say. The Sugar Act and Townshend Acts had been passed before the Stamp Act. In the end, Britain did repeal (get rid of) the Stamp Act, but then passed an act requiring the colonists to house British soldiers.
They wanted to show that it still had the right to collect taxes in America.
ANSWER:In response to the American uproar, Parliament repealed the Stamp Act in the spring of 1766. But to save face it passed the Declaratory Act, which declared that Parliament had full power to pass laws and levy taxes on America "in all cases whatsoever."
Derogate
Declaratory Act, (1766), a declaration by the British Parliament that accompanied the repeal of the Stamp Act. It stated that the British Parliament's taxing authority was the same in America as in Great Britain. Parliament had directly taxed the colonies for revenue in the Sugar Act (1764) and the Stamp Act (1765).
American boycotts hurt the British economy severely and led Parliament to repeal the Townshend Acts.
American boycotts hurt the British economy severely and led Parliament to repeal the Townshend Acts.
American boycotts hurt the British economy severely and led Parliament to repeal the Townshend Acts.
The rioting an boycotting were harming British trade.
The Sugar Act was enacted by the Parliament in Britain in order to tax items in America. The act was repealed when Britain no longer ad control over the colonies.
American boycotts hurt the British economy severely and led Parliament to repeal the Townshend Acts.
Trade with the colonies was economically important to Great Britain. The colonists thought the economic implications would be enough for the British Parliament to repeal the Intolerable Acts.
The Declaratory Act was an act of the Parliament of Great Britain. It repealed the Stamp Act of 1765 because boycotts were hurting British trade, using the declaration to justify the repeal.
because they were getting no money
his use of this he hopes that the british will give up his use of non-violent protests will change their mind
people were angered by taxes and therefore they were withdrawn.