Do you think the Bostonians' reactions to the Stamp Act were treasonous? Why, or why not? Why do you think England responded by repealing the Stamp Act rather than arresting the rebellious colonists?

This can be argued both ways.

Actions were treasonous - The colonists reaction to the Stamp Act can be seen as treasonous because they were clearly betraying the wishes of the British government.

Actions are not treasonous - The colonists reaction to the Stamp Act was justified, as the Stamp Act was passed by the British parliament and not the colonial legislautre. Failing to include the colonist input when passing these laws made it unfair, so the colonists had the right to protest against the Stamp Act.

The British government responded by repealing the Stamp Act instead of arresting people because they realized that the law they implemented was not working. The British government wanted to repair the relationship between them and the colonists to ensure their system of trading and using the colonists for natural resources would not disappear