The Bloody Massacre in King Street was what we know today as the Boston Massacre of 1770 on March 5th. It was a nightmarish night for the American mob who opposed the British Army. Five colonist died that night sadly and 4 were critically wounded. This event was the straw that broke the camel’s back. Some say this was just a collection of anger released by both sides as a result of the Townshend Act. Three documents analyzed is one from the British Captain Thomas Preston’s account of what happened. Then we have to American sided documents, one being anonymous and another being from the Boston Journal which was wrote a week after the massacre. All three documents announce that it is the 29th regiment under Captains Preston’s order who was involved …show more content…
He explains the beginning of the night by saying that the American mob was yelling horrible words and evil threats toward his men. In both the Anonymous document and the Boston Gazette there is no account of that occurring. Here is where the bias comes in by leaving out an important fact of what happened that night.
In the Anonymous letter there is a woman who is James Mcdeed’s wife who was a grenadier in the 29th regiment told her that the soldiers already stated they would have their swords and bayonets covered with New England blood. No other letter includes this statement which could make some believe that it was just a rumor going around which then got the colonist ready to defend. The differences before the shooting began differ in all three of the documents. In the Anonymous document the shooting began from a soldier challenging a rope maker to a boxing match. After being beaten he proceeds to go get several soldiers. After being bested again the soldiers repeated this process several times again before finally giving up and from this they said on the fifth of March we will inflict damage upon the inhabitants of this town. According to the Boston Journal
My original thoughts on the Boston Massacre were that the name rang true. I based these thoughts solely on the idea that no matter how colonist act, the military should never use excessive force in maintaining the peace. During my closer review of the actual event I have come to believe this has been given the name massacre in error. When you look at all of the depositions together and then start to take out the differences you will notice that everyone account of the event is nearly the same. The differences that are evident during the trial have been made by biased opinions and propaganda to promote the release of British troops from Boston. Although the ruling may not have been just, it served its purpose and drew the troops away from Boston in the end.
The Boston Massacre was an event that could have never happened. The innocent lives could have been saved and the British troopers would have never been put on Trial. The aftermath of the lives been loss in Boston Massacre was a trial to punish the British Troopers and finally get them out America. The lawyer of the British troops was a man named John Adams, who was the cousin of Sam Adams. John’s role in the Boston Massacre trial was to represent his clients without negotiate his role as an American. Since John had to stand behind the British troops, he had to team up with different other lawyers to make sure the British troops be treated fair. John’s ethic perspective was deontological ethics because he may not believe the British troops
What started out as a simple snowball fight was turned into a huge catastrophic dilemma. A few colonists started to throw snowballs at a group of Patriots. However, as more and more people joined in on the bullying, things like sticks, rocks, and bricks were being lunged at them. The Patriots then fired at the group, killing some. The press exaggerated this and turned it into a “massacre” so people would turn on the Patriots even more when in reality, they were just protecting themselves.
On June, 17th 1775 began a fight between the British and the Americans, it took place on Breed’s HIll. In Charlestown Peninsula, North side of Boston Harbor, this battle was the bloodest of the Revoltionary in America. The British Commander, Lieutenant General Thomas Gage, Major General William Howe. There were about 2,400 troops being lead by Major general Howe.
On April 19th, 1775 British troops marched to Lexington and Concord, where many militia men already awaited their arrival. The British were after the ammunition of the militia. Paul Revere previously warned the militia so that they could be prepared. Many people are unaware of the fact that Paul Revere was accompanied by William Dawes on his midnight ride.
Even though no one can know for sure who attacked first, the soldiers or the colonists the colonists still fought showing it wasn’t one sided so not a massacre. The evidence that supports my claim is in John Buford’s painting (document B)you can see colonists holding clubs, cudgels, and other weapons and they are using them. This corroborates with the information given in Captain Thomas Preston’s article stated “On this a general attack was made . . . by a great number of heavy clubs and snowballs being thrown at them [the soldiers], by which all our lives were in imminent (immediate) danger,” This evidence supports my claim because although Captain Preston may have a bias against the colonists, John buford’s painting has virtually no bias considering it was painted about one hundred years after the event happened.
That day would happen on March 5th 1770. On this evening, a British guard was patrolling a custom house, some colonists began taunting the soldier and soon a crowd of angry colonists arrived. The British officer decided it would be necessary to call in more troops. Later, around eight soldiers arrived to support the guard, by this time the mob grew to about three hundred people. A colonist kicked one of the soldiers down, and the soldier fired upon the crowd. After a short pause, the other British troop fired on the colonists. Thanks to the press and art of Paul Revere, this event is now known as the Boston Massacre. The Boston Tea Party, one of the most famous events of per-revolution America. The British imposed a tax on all tea and this united the colonists in an agreement against the tax. The Sons of Liberty once again mobbed up and threatened the shop owners to not support the tax. Throughout the colonies, agents of the Tea Act were forced to resign. When this didn't seem to be enough, the Sons of Liberty devised a plan at the liberty tree in Boston. On the night of December 16th a group of men dressed as Mohawk Indians, boarded four British ships carrying tea and dumped it all into the harbor. This tea never landed and therefore this tea was never
On March 5, 1770 the dreadful day came. A mob of people went in front of the Customs Office in Boston Massachusetts and started to throw stuff and give insults at the soldiers. As a result to this so-called harassment the soldiers fired on the crowd. The first to die was a black man named Crispus Attucks. He was a native of Frainghan, Massachusetts. He escaped from slavery in 1750 and had become a sailor. Crispus Attucks is considered the first martyr of the American Independence (Mahin 1). The four others who died were Samuel gray, a rope maker; James Caldwell, a sailor; Samuel Maverick, a seventeen year old apprentice and Patrick Carr, a leather worker and Irish immigrant. All in which were unarmed and brutally murdered. The soldiers killed three, mortally wounded two others, and wounded six. How much ha...
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.
In Thomas Preston’s account of what happened that night, he claimed that he did not order anyone to fire. He said that the residents of Boston were obnoxious and pugnacious. Many other people have claimed that Boston
Captain Thomas Preston’s vision of the Boston massacre was an incident were a British soldier accidently fired his weapon and his men then followed after resulting in the death of five Bostonians including free black sailor Cripus Attucks. Starting the story Captain Thomas Preston admits that the arrival of the Majesty’s Troops were obnoxious to the inhabitants. Troops have done everything in their power to weaken the regiments by falsely propagating untruths about them. On Monday at 8 o’ clock two soldiers were beaten and townspeople then broke into two meetinghouses and rang the bells. But at 9 o’ clock some troops have informed Captain Thomas Preston that the bell was not ringing to give notice for a fire but to make the troops aware of the attack the towns people were going to bring upon them.
Captain Preston and his men are not guilty of committing murder. Teenage boys were harassing a British soldier by calling him names like lobster and making fun of they way they walked. The boys were also throwing snowballs with seashells in them at the British soldier. The soldier never did or said anything until the seventeen year old boy walked up to him and started running his mouth. The soldier then hit the boy in the mouth with the butt of his gun. The boy backed off and went back to the crowd. About 200 people came out of the bars and joined the crowd. They were carrying clubs with them because they
...of the soldiers who killed five citizens. John Adams yelled “Bad behavior” of Attucks. he continued “Whose very looks was enough to terrify any person” Twenty years earlier before all this happened William Brown placed an advertisement describing Crispus. William Warren was already looking for him and because he was a runaway slave they killed him.
Hence, on April 2, San Martín ordered his troops to mallet the position with their cannons. Pushed by the Patriot infantry , The royalist men garrisoned on the houses of the land were forced to surrender, while the reserves brought by O’Higgins captured the dispersed soldiers.
The attack was on October 30, 1838 (Blair). At the time there was 30 or 40 families living there, so it was not very big (Blair). In the late afternoon, a band of 200-250 men rode into the settlement (Blair). The women and children ran across a stream into the woods to hide, while the men and some boys went into the blacksmith’s shop (Blair). The men from the militia would fire through the large gaps in between the logs the blacksmith’s shop was built of (Blair). They ended up killing everyone inside. In the end, there were 17 Saints killed and 13 wounded (Blair; Slaughter 12). It was an extremely brutal attack.