1. Thomas Whately, Treasury Secretary and author of the Stamp Act, defended the act by writing a 100 page analysis in which he said that the act was not a deviation from normal business. If it was not a deviation why not just say so? Why write 100 pages on the issue.

2. He argued that Parliament was and always had been an Imperial Parliament and thus could legislate anywhere the British King was in power.

3. Whately also claimed that the colonials had virtual representation: everyone in the empire is virtually represented by every member of parliament.

4. Whatley writes: "the Inhabitants of the Colonies are represented in Parliament: they do not indeed chuse the Members of that Assmebly; neither are Nine Tenths of the Pople of Britain Electors . . . . and yet are they not represented in Parliament? Is their vast Property subject to Taxes without their Consent? Are they all arbitrarily bound by Laws to which they have not agreed? The Colonies are in exactly the same Situation: All British Subjects are really in the same; none are actually, all are virtually represented in Parliament; for every Member of Parliament sits in the House, not as Representative of his own Constituents, but as one of that august Assembly by which all the Commons of Great Britain are represented(Greene, Colonies to Nation, 48-49).

5. Response to Whately by Daniel Dulany (who will remain a loyalist during the war). Considerations on the Propriety of imposting taxes in the British Colonies (1765)

6. He writes that "There is not that intimate and inseparable relation between the electors of Great-Britain, and the Inhabitants of the colonies, which must inevitably involve both in the same taxation; on the contrary, not a single actual elector in England, might be immediately affected by a taxation in America, imposed by a statute which would have a general operation and effect, upon the properties of the inhabitants of the colonies. The latter might be oppressed in a thousand shapes, without any Sympathy, or exciting any alarm in the former. Moreover, even acts, oppressive and injurious to the colonies in an extreme degree, might become popular in England, from the promise or expectation, that the very measures which depressed the colonies, would give ease to the Inhabitants of Great Britain" (Greene, Colonies to Nation, 55).