Sara Delurski
Mrs. Norris, period 1
Boston Massacre Argumentative Essay
January 6th, 2023
On March 5th, 1770, British soldiers protecting British officials on King Street in Boston fired into a mob of colonists, killing five civilians and wounding six others. This altercation, dubbed the Boston Massacre, was vital for the lead-up to the fight for American independence. The argument on who was at fault for the incident is still in question today. British soldiers claim that they had heard somebody say the word ‘fire’ while the protestors were assaulting the guards, giving them a reason to fire. Colonists claim they fired on their own accord and that the British merely wanted to kill civilians who posed no threat to Britain. However, the colonists
…show more content…
According to Captain Thomas Preston in Document B, “On my asking the soldiers why they fired without orders, they said they heard the word fire and supposed it came from me. This might be the case as many of the mob called out fire, fire, but I assured the men that I gave no such order.” Since somebody shouted the order to fire, the British soldiers were wholly following what they thought was an official order. If nobody from the British ordered “fire,” the Americans could have been firing lethal weaponry. And because they waited for an order to shoot, it proves they did not fire into the crowd solely to put an end to the protest. They waited for a command before dealing with such a belligerent crowd. This evidence supports the idea that the colonists were responsible for the Boston Massacre since the British had not fired without hearing somebody shout the command to fire and that they were solely protecting the crown officials of …show more content…
According to Captain Thomas Preston in Document B, “On this, a general attack was made on the men by a great number of heavy clubs and snowballs being thrown at them.” This quote is a statement from the commander of the British squad on King Street, Boston. He explained that the colonists had been dangering the lives of the guards on duty. Since the purpose of the soldiers was to protect crown officials, the attack on the soldiers was an attempt to get past them and harm crown officials, which warrants their firing even if nobody gave an order. This evidence supports the colonists being responsible for the Boston Massacre because the British soldiers had a valid reason to shoot a colonist who is a threat to a British crown official or a British soldier, and colonists chucking heavy clubs and snowballs at soldiers were viewed as dangers to both the soldiers and the crown
This caught the attention of Captain Thomas Preston and his squad of soldiers. There actions after approaching the scene was unbearable to witness and will forever be know throughout history. Captain Preston's men began firing into the crowd of colonist. Turning a little threat in Boston into a massacre. The Boston Massacre.
While Americans’ criticism was arising, a serious conflict happened on March 5, 1770, among “patriot” mobs, throwing stones, and the British soldiers. Some settlers were killed that time and it led to a campaign that America should be independent from the English. In the fall of 1770, British Captain Thomas Preston and eight of his regulars were tried for the alleged murder of five Boston colonials. At the conclusion of
As a witness to The Boston Massacre as a Patriot as an English citizen, I believe that the British Soldiers are unstable to protect us if they will kill us. The acts that lead up to the killing of five patriots were downgrading us. After are Victory in the French and Indian War we became in debt. The British officials decided to make laws such as Writs of Assistance, Sugar Act, Quartering Act, Stamp Act and the Proclamation of 1763 and more were soon made. This just anger us so a boycott was made called The Sons of Liberty the leader was Samuel Adams.
Call me a tory or not, but the british in the Boston Massacre were not guilty of murder and opening fire on crowd for no reason. The british completely and utterly acted in self defense on March 5,1770. Know you might say well they placed taxes on us… NEWS FLASH… this is about whether this is murder or done in self defense, not taxes. Trust me this king’s Street mess was definitely in self defense.
The Boston Massacre The Boston Massacre was a riot a deadly riot that occurred on March 5, 1770, on King Street in Boston. It was between The Colonists and some British soldiers. The Colonists were to blame for The Boston Massacre because they abused and confused British Soldiers. The Colonists were to blame for the Boston Massacre because they abused the soldiers. They abused the soldiers by throwing snowballs, and clubs at them.
The Boston Massacre was and still the most debatable massacre. No one seems to know what actually took place on March 5th 1770. They are many different stories written telling on what had happened that day but no one is sure what is facts and what is myth. In this essay I will help evaluate three documents written days after the event happened. One reason why this event took place was because the Parliament passed the Stamp act, which is a way to finance the British Troops in North America.
The British fired into the crowd without orders of the leader. The colonists yelled at them to shoot
This statement disproves the definition of massacre because it was not an indiscriminate slaughter of people. If the soldiers were begin attacked it was merely self defense. Mr. Woodall was not the only account that stated the soldiers were being attacked by the townspeople before any firing took place, Jane Whitehouse said that same. She said that one man threw wood at one of the soldiers. Further more looking at the Revere painting, Preston’s deposition and also testimonies from people that gave their account of the story we can conclude that calling it the “Boston Massacre” would be stretching the truth of an event that has been warped for years.
Seeking to downplay the severity of the event, they portrayed it as a tragic incident resulting from mob aggression. Accounts published in newspapers like the London Chronicle in April 1770 depicted the soldiers as acting in self-defense. According to one such account, the soldiers were "compelled to act in their own defense against the seditious and violent mob" (The Boston Massacre Historical Society). These narratives aimed to justify the actions of the British soldiers and shift the blame onto the colonists, thus shaping a different perspective on the
And at length proceeded on our way to concord which we then learnt was our destination, in order to destroy a magazine of stores there.”. In the Sworn Affidavit by a British Officer named Edward Gould, there was more evidence to support this claim, too. He noted, “...from whence we proceeded to Lexington; on our arrival at that place, we saw a body of provincial troops armed, to the number of about sixty or seventy men; on our approach.”. Both of these selected quotes support the claim. They explain how the British’s departure that day was intended for going to Lexington.
Although many historians believe that the Boston Massacre was an act of self-defense, it is clear that the incident was murder by the British soldiers. First of all, the soldiers came out with all of their bayonets and other weapons raised. This shows it was murder because the soldiers were prepared to fire into the crowd when they got into the street, not just rescue the sentry. Secondly, after the first round of bullets, the soldiers reloaded and fired again. This is evidence for murder because the soldiers clearly intended to kill more colonists, not just try to scare them off.
Defending the Unpopular: John Adams and the Boston Massacre Trial The 1760s brought plenty of political tension between Britain and its colonies. Britain, suffering financially, had enforced tax acts onto the colonies to “repay them” for defending them in the Seven Years' War. The colonists, however, did not take this lightly, arguing that Britain had no right to tax them without representation in their government. On March 5, 1770, a fight broke out between Boston colonists and a squad from the 29th regiment when the crowd taunted and threw objects.
This Act made colonies very angry. They react with a boycott. Now watching live from just block away of the ground breaking event The Boston Massacre. Now flying in from Boston is their troops coming in to maintain order to the colonists. British officer walking over to a group of boycotting Colonials.
The Boston Massacre was a street fight that occurred on March 5, 1770, between a “patriot”. They were throwing sticks, snowballs, and trash at a group of British troops. The loyalists got very annoyed with the patriots so they shot into the mob killing five. The riot began when around 50 colonists attacked a British sentinel. A British officer called in for additional troops
The Boston Massacre is an event most Americans and British students learn about over the course of their education. In America, we learn that British soldiers fired upon innocent civilians, although this may not have been the case. British historians have referred to the Boston Massacre as the "Incident on King Street". After looking over the "Captain Thomas Preston 's Account of the Boston Massacre", as well as "Boston Massacre Trial Depositions" I believe that American historians should refer to the "Boston Massacre" as the "Incident on King Street". The definition of a massacre refers to an unnecessary and random killing of a large number of individuals.