1. What arguments does Whattley make in support of the Sugar Act? 2. How strong do you think his arguments are?

3. If you were a colonist, how would you respond to Whattley's claims?
plase help pic is below

1. He claims that given the cost for England of the French and Indian War,  and the benefits the colonies got from their mother-country, such as land, peace, and a forthcoming growing trade, them supporting their military forces is the least they can do.

Explanation:

2. His arguments are biased, as he was a British treasurer, meaning that his best interest was for the Sugar Act to be enacted. Furthermore, he didn´t seem to take under consideration that American colonists favored dealing with foreign planters.  

3. The Sugar Act is a form of taxation without representation, which is not fair. Furthermore, it´s an economic threat to the development of the colonies, and therefore, a reason to envision an armed conflict.

the answer is either c or d i think its d