More handpicked essays just for you.
Boston massacre essay introduction
American revolution social political and economic
The boston massacre easy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
On March 5, 1770 a fight broke out in the streets of Boston, Massachusetts between a patriot mob and British soldiers. Citizens attacked a squad of soldiers by throwing snowballs, stones and sticks. British Army soldiers in turn killed five civilians and injured six others. The presence of British troops had been stationed in Boston, the capital of Province of Massachusetts Bay since 17681. The British existence was increasingly unwelcome. The British troops were sent to Boston in order to protect and support the crown-appointed colonial officials attempting to enforce unpopular Parliamentary legislation. Boston, the capital of the Province of Massachusetts Bay and important shipping town, was a major center of resistance to unpopular acts of taxation by the British Parliament in the 1760s2. In 1768, the Townshend Acts were placed upon the colonists, by which a variety of common items that were manufactured in Britain and exported to the colonies were subjected to import tariffs3. The Massachusetts House of Representatives began a campaign against the Townshend Acts by sending a petition to King George III asking for the repeal of the act. The House also sent what became known as the Massachusetts Circular Letter to other colonial assemblies, asking them to join the resistance movement, and called for a boycott of merchants importing the affected goods. As a response, Lord Hillsborough, who was the leader of the office of Colonial Secretary, was forced to take action. In April 1768, Hillsborough sent a letter to the colonial governors in America instructing them to dissolve the colonial assemblies responsible for the repeal4. When the house of colonial governors refused to comply and rescind the letter. Hillsborough then stated... ... middle of paper ... ...An Account.” Accessed 05, 2001. http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/bostonmassacre/bostonmassacre.html. 14. Allison, Robert. The Boston Massacre. Beverly, MA: Applewood Books, 2006. “The Boston Massacre Trials: An Account.” Accessed 05, 2001. http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/bostonmassacre/bostonmassacre.html. 15. Allison, Robert. The Boston Massacre. Beverly, MA: Applewood Books, 2006. “The Boston Massacre Trials: An Account.” Accessed 05, 2001. http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/bostonmassacre/bostonmassacre.html. 16. Allison, Robert. The Boston Massacre. Beverly, MA: Applewood Books, 2006. “The Boston Massacre Trials: An Account.” Accessed 05, 2001. 17. Kidder, Frederic. History of the Boston Massacre. Munsell, 1870. 18. Zinn, Howard. A People’s History of the United States. New York: HarperCollins, 1999.
The events of March 5, 1770 should and have been remembered as momentous and predictable. Perhaps not the night or city specifically, but the state of affairs in Boston, if not throughout The English Colonies, had declined to the point that British troops found themselves frequently assaulted with stones, dirt, and human feces. The opinions and sentiments of either side were certainly not clandestine. Even though two spectators express clear culpability for the opposing side, they do so only in alteration of detail. The particulars of the event unfold the same nonetheless. The happening at the Custom House off King Street was a catastrophic inevitability. Documents from the Boston Massacre trial, which aid us in observing from totally different perceptions. The depositions of witnesses of the event prove to be useful; an English officer Captain Preston and a colonial Robert Goddard give relatively dissimilar details. In spite of these differences, they still both describe the same state of affairs.
Passed in 1767, the Townshend Acts put taxes on several basic items that, to obtain them, needed to be imported. These items included glass, paper, lead, and tea. The British planned out the Townshend Acts a little differently than they had previously planned other acts. They passed the Townshend Acts in a way for them to still make money, but to avoid direct conflict with the colonists. The British thought that if they taxed imported items, as opposed to taxing items produced in the colonies (like the Stamp Act did), that the colonists wouldn’t have as much hostility towards the act. The second part of the Townshend Acts was sending of troops and warships to Boston. In September of 1768, warships arrived in Boston harbor carrying four thousand troops. The soldiers came to keep structure after all the colonists’ chaotic reactions of the past acts. The establishment of the Writs of Assistance was the last part of the Townshend Acts. British soldiers used the Writs of Assistance to search colonists’ houses for smuggled goods. After the British passed the Townshend Acts, the colonists had several reactions in response to them. One reaction was boycotting. This colonial boycott was on all imported British goods, and it was extremely widespread. The boycott encouraged more colonists to join the Sons and Daughters of Liberty, which lead to many colonists replacing items, which they would normally buy from British merchants, with homemade versions. These items included fabrics, candles, and tea. Another reaction was non-importation agreements. Non-importation agreements are written agreements that said that whoever signed one would not purchase items from British merchants until they got representation in British Parliament. A tremendous amount of colonists signed these agreements, and those who didn’t were sometimes harassed or had their property destroyed. Similarly,
The Sons of Liberty answered the call. In an act of defiance, “a few dozen of the Sons of Liberty, opposing new British laws in the colonies, systematically dumped three shiploads of tea into Boston harbor. They acted to prevent the royal authorities from collecting taxes on that import” (Bell). This left Parliament infuriated. They did what they only knew how to do and put a tighter squeeze on the colonists.
Being a great schemer, Lord North struck out the plan of the East India Company’s sending tea to America, hoping thereby to outwit us, and to establish the Townshend Act effectually, which will forever after be pleaded as a precedent for every imposition the Parliament of Great Britain shall think proper to saddle us with. It is much to be wished that the Americans will convince Lord North that they are not yet ready to have the yoke of slavery riveted about their necks, and send back the tea whence it came.
In the pre-revolutionary period the Hudson Valley was of great importance. In 1765 the Stamp act Congress met to shake the existing government established by the English. American opposition to the Stamp Act began shortly after its passage in March 1765. The colonists were fed up with “taxation without representation”, and desired change. The Stamp Act Congress met in New York City in October 1765. Delegates from nine colonies attended, and petitioned the king for repeal of the act, denouncing it as taxation without representation. Many British merchants joined in this appeal. Their exports of manufactures to the colonies had increased markedly since 1750 and they feared the effects of American refusal to pay commercial debts amounting to millions of pounds. On October 31, the day before the Stamp Act was to go into effect, 200 merchants in New York City vowed to stop importing British goods, beginning the First No importation Movement. Then they joined storekeepers, artisans, sailors, and laborers in a mass protest meeting. On the next night, 2000 residents surrounded the fort where the stamps were being guarded and then plundered the house of a British officer (French, pg 56). These mob actions prompted the lieutenant governor to ask General Thomas Gage, the British military commander...
Phoner begins to set the stage for the Boston Massacre by talking about the entrance of four thousand soldiers into Boston. He talks about three different events that led up to the massacre and were witnessed by George Hewes. The first event the slaying of Christopher Seider ten days before the massacre. Seider was an eleven-year-old boy was picketing the shop of a merchant who was violating the anti-import resolution. He was killed by Ebenezer Richardson, who shot into the group of people. The next event was the fight between a few soldiers and ropewalk workers. The ropewalk workers beat the soldiers, and the soldiers sought to seek revenge later on the fifth of March. The final event was the attempt to collect an overdue bill from a British
The imperial tactics of the British Empire were exercised on the colonists through heavy taxes trade restrictions because of their mercantilist economy. The Stamp Act taxed the colonists directly on paper goods ranging from legal documents to newspapers. Colonists were perturbed because they did not receive representation in Parliament to prevent these acts from being passed or to decide where the tax money was spent. The colonists did not support taxation without representation. The Tea Act was also passed by Parliament to help lower the surplus of tea that was created by the financially troubled British East India Company. The colonists responded to this act by executing the Boston Tea Party which tossed all of the tea that was imported into the port of Boston. This precipitated the Boston Port Act which did not permit the colonists to import goods through this port. The colonists protested and refused all of these acts which helped stir the feelings of rebellion among the colonists. The British Mercantilist economy prevented the colonists from coin...
The Boston Massacre is considered by many historians to be the first battle of the Revolutionary War. The fatal incident happened on March 5 of 1770. The massacre resulted in the death of five colonists. British troops in the Massachusetts Bay Colony were there to stop demonstrations against the Townshend Acts and keep order, but instead they provoked outrage. The British soldiers and citizens brawled in streets and fought in bars. “The citizens viewed the British soldiers as potential oppressors, competitors for jobs, and a treat to social mores'; (Mahin 1). A defiant anti-British fever was lingering among the townspeople.
The Boston Massacre of 1770 was an act where soldiers killed 5 colonists that were part of the crowd that was rising up against the soldiers. Some believe that the Boston Massacre was pure murder, but others know better, and I know that it was simply just an act of self-defense. According to Exhibits B, E, and H the colonists were the ones who started up this riot that took place at 9 pm, and became physically aggressive towards the soldiers. This means that not only is this riot not the soldiers fault. There is a scientific term called Herd Behavior. Herd Behavior is when a riot or crowd is together and a person suggests/ does something and the all of a sudden that is what everyone is doing. So according to Exhibit C, a colonist hit Captain
The Boston Massacre was and is still a debatable Massacre. The event occurred on March 5, 1776. It involved the rope workers of the colonial Boston and two British regiments, the twenty-ninth and the fourteenth regiments. Eleven people were shot in the incident; five people were killed and the other six were merely wounded. The soldiers and the captain, Thomas Preston, were all put on trial. All were acquitted of charges of murder, however the two soldiers who fired first, Private Mathew Killroy, and Private William Montgomery, the two soldiers were guilty of manslaughter. The causes were numerous for this event. There had been a nation wide long-term dislike towards the British, and a growing hatred towards them by the people of Boston. Even before the two regiments were sent in to monitor Boston there was a growing feud before the two sides.
On March 5, 1770, an event occurred in Boston, which consisted of British troops shooting upon colonists. People refer to this as a massacre, but they only look at one side of the story. The Boston Massacre in 1770 was not really a massacre, but a mutual riot (Boston Massacre History Society). British soldiers went to America to keep the people of Boston in order. However, the soldier's presence there was not welcomed by the Bostonians and this made things worse (Boston Massacre History Society). The British had to fire their guns because the Bostonians were antagonizing the soldiers, which caused five people to die. The Bostonians made the soldiers feel threatened so in turn they acted in self-defense. The British soldiers and their Captain had to go through a trial, to prove they were not to blame for what had occurred.
The Intolerable Acts of 1774 greatly fueled the First Continental Congress. In response to the Boston Tea party, the British Parliament decided that a series of laws were needed to calm the rising resistance in America. “One law closed Boston Harbor until Bostonians paid for the destroyed tea. Another law restricted the activities of the Massachusetts legislature and gave added powers to the post of governor of Massachusetts.” As one can imagine, the American colonist viewed this as the British attempt to curtail their quest for independence.
Before the Boston Massacre even occurred, tensions were high in the city of Boston between the Bostonians and the British. At this time people were just getting over the Stamp Act and were now angered by the new taxes also known as the Townshend Duties. This new tax caused Bostonians to become more aggressive causing the British to send more soldiers to impose the laws of Parliament and to restore order among the people. The arrival of more soldiers only caused more of an uproar between the people of Boston and the red coats. Bostonians went out of their way to harass British soldiers whenever they got the chance, but on March 5, 1770 both sides acted unacceptably resulting in the Boston Massacre (84-85).
The Boston Massacre was one the most controversial massacre in American history that teased the coming of the American Revolution. People were taunting a British soldier who was standing “in front of the Boston Custom House” who got very frustrated to the point where he hit somebody. The soldier got overwhelmed by people who came after he hit one of them, called help from his fellow soldiers. When Captain Preston and his soldiers arrived at the scene, people were coming from everywhere, some were trying to fight them and some were just there to watch. Then, one of the soldier shot at the people and his fellow soldiers started shooting after, which killed five people. This what ended it up being called the Boston Massacre. Some might say that the murderer were the soldiers who shot the people, but the real murderer is
Throughout history, events are sparked by something, which causes emotions to rise and tensions to come to a breaking point. The Boston Massacre was no exception; America was feeling the pressure of the British and was ready to break away from the rule. However, this separation between these two parties would not come without bloodshed on both sides. The British did not feel the American had the right to separate them from under British rule, but the Americans were tired of their taxes and rules being placed upon them and wanted to succeed from their political tyrants. The Boston Massacre would be the vocal point in what would be recognized, as the Revolutionary War in American history and the first place lives would be lost for the cost of liberty. Even though the lives were lost that day, eight British soldiers were mendaciously accused of murder when it was clearly self-defense. People who are placed in a situation where their lives are threatened have the right to defend themselves. History does not have the right to accuse any one event those history may have considered the enemy guilty when they are fighting for their lives.