[69] _Annual Register_, viii. (1765), 92. [70] _Bedford Correspondence_, iii., 281; Walpole, _Letters_, iv., 365-66. [71] _Annual Register_, xxi. (1778), 256. [72] Lord Charlemont to Flood, Jan. 8, 1766, _Letters to Flood_, p. 5. [73] Conway to Lord Hertford, Feb. 12, 1766, in a MS. collection of Conway's letters, to which Messrs. Sotheran kindly gave me access. [74] Conway to Hertford, April 29, 1766, MS. Sotheran, _u.s._ [75] Beckford to Chatham, Oct. 15, 1766, MS. Pitt Papers, 19; _Grenville Papers_, iii., 336. CHAPTER V. GROWTH OF THE KING'S POWER. While Chatham was suffering from gout and Conway from indecision, Townshend had opportunities for mischief. His brilliant wit and oratory gave him extraordinary influence in the house of commons, which he used merely for his own ends, for he was unprincipled and greedy for popularity. Whatever it might be that the majority in the house wished to have done, he was anxious to be the doer of it. This desire to lead the house by carrying out its wishes was probably the true reason of his opposition to Chatham's Indian policy. It led him to take a more disastrous line with reference to America. The colonies were irritated and suspicious. Massachusetts was encroaching on the royal prerogative by passing an amnesty bill, and was quarrelling over it with its governor, Bernard, and the New York assembly was defying the authority of parliament by refusing to provide the troops with certain articles specified in the mutiny act. An equally unconciliatory spirit prevailed in England, where the repeal of the stamp act had become unpopular. It was necessary to keep a permanent force in America, and the colonists should have been willing to contribute to the defence of the empire by paying for it. Their refusal was attributed to a desire to save their pockets, which to some extent was the case, and Englishmen were angry at the prospect of being called upon to meet expenses which should have been borne by others. Even warm friends of the colonies held that a military establishment should be paid for out of colonial revenues, and Shelburne was considering how a fund might be raised without taxation.[76] Unfortunately, Townshend chose to pander to the feelings of the majority of the commons. In a debate on the army supplies on January 26, 1767, he boasted, without any previous consultation with his fellow-ministers, that he could raise a revenue from America nearly sufficient to maintain the troops there. The house received his words with applause, his colleagues with dumb dismay. Grenville and Lord George Sackville took them up and forced him to pledge himself to make them good. [Sidenote: _AMERICAN REVENUE ACTS._]