Tragedy struck in March 5, 1770 when five civilians in Boston were shot, and six were injured due to the actions of British soldiers in the area. Tensions were high on King Street, as the citizens became more and more outraged at the British’s taxation of Boston residents. Despite the small number of casualties, this event became pegged as the Boston Massacre. The event, as well as the aftermath, caused a stir with the American public. Due to massive propaganda, it became a crucial event that sparked the Revolutionary War and many American citizens’ feelings towards the British. Ultimately, this was one of the main factors that contributed to the formation of the American Revolutionary War.
The 14th and 29th regiments of the British Army
They would also assist the custom officials in the Commission of Customs by collecting levied taxes. The Commissioners of Customs had their headquarters situated in Boston. The 29th Regiment were asked to guard the Custom-House, where the commission resided. Although Governor Bernard believed that the troops would help to sustain peace, the troops mainly caused tension between the opposition and the supporters. One primary incident was on February 22, 1770, when a rowdy and violent crowd gathered outside the shop of a known loyalist and informer. Ebenezer Richardson tried to break up the crowd, and the crowd turned on him and began throwing rocks at his home. From his window, Richardson fired his gun at the crowd and killed Christopher Seider, an eleven year old (“The Boston Massacre of March 5,
It is an article published just days after the Boston Massacre that gives the details of the situation, as well as the aftermath. Similar to the testimonies, it provided myself with an idea of civilians’ reactions to the event. It gives a vivid account of what occurred, and who was shot as a result of the soldiers firing into the crowd. The article provided myself with perspectives from both the British and colonists’ sides. They seems to be unbiased in this article, pinning the blame on neither side. It gives descriptions of the people that were shot. The article indicates to readers that these individuals were more than just people who were shot, but they were innocent individuals who perished for no particular reason.
“Revolutionary Violence and the Relevance of History” gives a detailed description of the Boston Massacre. It scrutinizes other scholarly journals about the Boston Massacre, whilst the author provides her viewpoint on the subject of those scholarly journals. The journal gives an analysis of the events; It tries to conclude which side was truly guilty. Was it the British soldiers, or the people intentionally taunting and threatening them to shoot? Through this analysis, I was able to decide which side my opinions fell on, and write my conclusion based on
First we will touch on the deposition of Theodore Bliss, a local colonist. In Mr. Bliss’s deposition he states the colonists were provoking the soldiers. The colonists were throwing snowballs and yelling aggravating words at them. According to Mr. Bliss it was not until a soldier was struck with a stick that the first fire was shot. The deposition state that the order to fire was not given by Captain Preston. After the first shot was fired Mr. Bliss thinks the captain gave the order to fire but is not sure due to the fact a lot of people were yelling at the soldiers to fire. Claims none of the colonists charged at the soldiers prior to the first shot, but that after the first shot a couple of the colonists attempted to ...
Boston should have handled the Grove fire tragedy better than it did. The disaster preparedness team was ready, and so were the hospitals that were training their stuff in the treatment of burns prior to the occurrence. The author expertly incorporates the mass treatment of the burns into his narrative. Further, Esposito delves into the details of the event, exposing the corrupted political system of Boston at that time. He reveals how renowned political entities escaped justice through dubious manners as the search for
Alfred Young is a historian who takes a harder look at the life of an ordinary Boston man, George Robert twelves Hewes, before and after the revolution changes in America. The book looks at the developments that led up to the American Revolution through the life Hewes, who goes from a shoemaker to a rebel. Not only was Hewes a participant in the Boston Massacre, he was also involved in the event that later would be referred to as the Tea party. His involvements in these events paint a clearer picture of what can motivate someone to take up arms and fight for their freedom.
The Americans acted on this plan, so British troops would be removed off American soil. The Americans had to plan about this riot for days and knew that some lives was going to be lost. The citizen were not thinking about the outcome of their plan, or how lives would be changed forever because their decision to pick a fight with the British troops would have been changed. My personal ethic perspective would be deontological ethic because I would react to by thinking about the wrong and right way because of my religion. Since I am a Christian, I would have to think to see if the result going to affect me in a negative way or influence my life in a positive way. If Americans would have thought about their religion and beliefs, then the Boston Massacre would have been an idea not an event. If I was one of the Americans in the Boston Massacre, I would have tried to talked people out of doing the deed. I would have questioned their beliefs and make them picture the outcome of picking a fight with the soldiers. Some of the American citizen would have backed down, but most of them was going to act upon the deed. Even someone would have tried to stop the angry mob, the results would have been the same anyways. If the Boston Massacre was avoided, American’s history would have been very different in terms of what would have happened with
Gross takes a different perspective on the American Revolution explaining its effect on the everyday life of those in Concord, MA. Gross focuses on the social history of a community as it relates directly to the study American civilization. These things all contributed to the buildup of the American Revolution. The declining economy and intolerable tax brought about hatred for the British. The Continental Congress raised up an army in case just for self-defense. There then was a period of dead suspense upon the Concordia’s they knew British were up to invasion just not when.
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.
To achieve this goal, the paper is organized into three main sections, they all have a sub-sections. The first section, provides info on the Warren Report and how it was false right from the beginning. In the second section, it discusses how the mob was involved with the killing of John Kennedy. The paper ends with a third section that offers reasons on why the conspiracy is likely true, giving reasons why Jack Ruby shot Lee Harvey Oswald. The paper also includes a sources page after the Works Cited that has images of the articles used. Before the paper begins the examination of the conspiracy theory, there is a need to provide some information on how the articles were written.
The British were to fault for the Boston massacre making it a great historical tragedy in our country. A reason why the Boston Massacre was the fault of the British is because they killed the colonists by firing their weapons in the crowd of 30-40 colonists. In the text it says (Boston massacre 2). "30-40 persons, mostly lads…the soldiers pushing their bayonets into people...the Captain
On March 5th, 1770 in Boston, Massachusetts, a soldier rang a town bell that meant there was a fire or that police backup was needed after being approached by Boston residents who were being hostile towards him. In response to the bell being rung, British commanding officer, Thomas Preston, came to the soldier’s aid with armed British troops. Because the bell also meant “fire,” many residents flooded into the area believing a fire was occurring. A mob broke out, and the hostility of the Boston citizens rose. Objects such as ice and rocks were thrown and many citizens were armed with clubs, sticks, and other objects. At one point, an object hit a soldier, causing his gun to go off. Amidst all of the people screaming “fire,” British troops thought that Preston told them to fire.
Brooks, Rebecca B. "The Boston Massacre." History of Massachusetts. N.p., 10 Nov. 2011. Web. 22 Apr. 2014.
I discussed the differences between Captain Thomas Preston’s Account of the Boston Massacre (1770) and Paul Revere, Image of The Bloody Massacre (1770). I then explained both men’s story beginning with Captain Thomas Preston’s vision of the event. I then explained Paul Revere version of the event. I then included my opinion which account I believed was most accurate and explained why.
This chapter provided information from the trial of Captain Thomas Preston. The chapter asked the question, “What really happened in the Boston Massacre”. Chapter four focused on the overall event of the Massacre and trying to determine if Captain Preston had given the order to fire at Boston citizens. The chapter provides background information and evidence from Preston’s trial to leave the reader answering the question the chapter presents. Although, after looking through all the witnesses’ testimonies some might sway in Captain Preston’s favor, just the way the grand jury did.
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
On March 5, 1770, five colonists lost their lives in what American history would deem their fight for liberty; however, several British soldiers were placed on trial for murder when they were only fighting for their lives against an anger mob. John Adams, who would become our second president, defended these soldiers in an attempted to prove their innocents. The trial was held on American soil and the outcome did not fare well for the British soldiers. Adams was able to keep them from receiving the death penalty, however both soldiers were “branded” for life as murders. Boston was a cauldro...
Many sections of the book were unnecessary and useless for my certain task. Most of the book was also written in a story format and was not cold hard facts. However Chapter 5 gave an in-depth description of the Boston Tea Party and also the effects it had on the colonist. It also stated what the colonies did about this and how they went about rectifying it.