essay on the boston massacre

• History Classics
• Your Profile
• Find History on Facebook (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Twitter (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on YouTube (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Instagram (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on TikTok (Opens in a new window)
• This Day In History
• History Podcasts
• History Vault

Boston Massacre

By: History.com Editors

Updated: August 11, 2023 | Original: October 27, 2009

The Boston Massacre was a deadly riot that occurred on March 5, 1770, on King Street in Boston. It began as a street brawl between American colonists and a lone British soldier, but quickly escalated to a chaotic, bloody slaughter. The conflict energized anti-British sentiment and paved the way for the American Revolution.

Why Did the Boston Massacre Happen?

Tensions ran high in Boston in early 1770. More than 2,000 British soldiers occupied the city of 16,000 colonists and tried to enforce Britain’s tax laws, like the Stamp Act and Townshend Acts . American colonists rebelled against the taxes they found repressive, rallying around the cry, “no taxation without representation.”

Skirmishes between colonists and soldiers—and between patriot colonists and colonists loyal to Britain (loyalists)—were increasingly common. To protest taxes, patriots often vandalized stores selling British goods and intimidated store merchants and their customers.

On February 22, a mob of patriots attacked a known loyalist’s store. Customs officer Ebenezer Richardson lived near the store and tried to break up the rock-pelting crowd by firing his gun through the window of his home. His gunfire struck and killed an 11-year-old boy named Christopher Seider and further enraged the patriots.

Several days later, a fight broke out between local workers and British soldiers. It ended without serious bloodshed but helped set the stage for the bloody incident yet to come.

How Many Died After Violence Erupted?

On the frigid, snowy evening of March 5, 1770, Private Hugh White was the only soldier guarding the King’s money stored inside the Custom House on King Street. It wasn’t long before angry colonists joined him and insulted him and threatened violence.

At some point, White fought back and struck a colonist with his bayonet. In retaliation, the colonists pelted him with snowballs, ice and stones. Bells started ringing throughout the town—usually a warning of fire—sending a mass of male colonists into the streets. As the assault on White continued, he eventually fell and called for reinforcements.

In response to White’s plea and fearing mass riots and the loss of the King’s money, Captain Thomas Preston arrived on the scene with several soldiers and took up a defensive position in front of the Custom House.

Worried that bloodshed was inevitable, some colonists reportedly pleaded with the soldiers to hold their fire as others dared them to shoot. Preston later reported a colonist told him the protestors planned to “carry off [White] from his post and probably murder him.”

The violence escalated, and the colonists struck the soldiers with clubs and sticks. Reports differ of exactly what happened next, but after someone supposedly said the word “fire,” a soldier fired his gun, although it’s unclear if the discharge was intentional.

Once the first shot rang out, other soldiers opened fire, killing five colonists–including Crispus Attucks , a local dockworker of mixed racial heritage–and wounding six. Among the other casualties of the Boston Massacre was Samuel Gray, a rope maker who was left with a hole the size of a fist in his head. Sailor James Caldwell was hit twice before dying, and Samuel Maverick and Patrick Carr were mortally wounded.  

Boston Massacre Fueled Anti-British Views

Within hours, Preston and his soldiers were arrested and jailed and the propaganda machine was in full force on both sides of the conflict.

Preston wrote his version of the events from his jail cell for publication, while Sons of Liberty leaders such as John Hancock and Samuel Adams incited colonists to keep fighting the British. As tensions rose, British troops retreated from Boston to Fort William.

Paul Revere encouraged anti-British attitudes by etching a now-famous engraving depicting British soldiers callously murdering American colonists. It showed the British as the instigators though the colonists had started the fight.

It also portrayed the soldiers as vicious men and the colonists as gentlemen. It was later determined that Revere had copied his engraving from one made by Boston artist Henry Pelham.

John Adams Defends the British

It took seven months to arraign Preston and the other soldiers involved in the Boston Massacre and bring them to trial. Ironically, it was American colonist, lawyer and future President of the United States John Adams who defended them.

Adams was no fan of the British but wanted Preston and his men to receive a fair trial. After all, the death penalty was at stake and the colonists didn’t want the British to have an excuse to even the score. Certain that impartial jurors were nonexistent in Boston, Adams convinced the judge to seat a jury of non-Bostonians.

During Preston’s trial, Adams argued that confusion that night was rampant. Eyewitnesses presented contradictory evidence on whether Preston had ordered his men to fire on the colonists.

But after witness Richard Palmes testified that, “…After the Gun went off I heard the word ‘fire!’ The Captain and I stood in front about half between the breech and muzzle of the Guns. I don’t know who gave the word to fire,” Adams argued that reasonable doubt existed; Preston was found not guilty.

The remaining soldiers claimed self-defense and were all found not guilty of murder. Two of them—Hugh Montgomery and Matthew Kilroy—were found guilty of manslaughter and were branded on the thumbs as first offenders per English law.

To Adams’ and the jury’s credit, the British soldiers received a fair trial despite the vitriol felt towards them and their country.

Aftermath of the Boston Massacre

The Boston Massacre had a major impact on relations between Britain and the American colonists. It further incensed colonists already weary of British rule and unfair taxation and roused them to fight for independence.

Yet perhaps Preston said it best when he wrote about the conflict and said, “None of them was a hero. The victims were troublemakers who got more than they deserved. The soldiers were professionals…who shouldn’t have panicked. The whole thing shouldn’t have happened.”

Over the next five years, the colonists continued their rebellion and staged the Boston Tea Party , formed the First Continental Congress and defended their militia arsenal at Concord against the redcoats, effectively launching the American Revolution . Today, the city of Boston has a Boston Massacre site marker at the intersection of Congress Street and State Street, a few yards from where the first shots were fired.

After the Boston Massacre. John Adams Historical Society. Boston Massacre Trial. National Park Service: National Historical Park of Massachusetts. Paul Revere’s Engraving of the Boston Massacre, 1770. The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History. The Boston Massacre. Bostonian Society Old State House. The Boston “Massacre.” H.S.I. Historical Scene Investigation.

HISTORY Vault: The American Revolution

Stream American Revolution documentaries and your favorite HISTORY series, commercial-free.

Sign up for Inside History

Get HISTORY’s most fascinating stories delivered to your inbox three times a week.

By submitting your information, you agree to receive emails from HISTORY and A+E Networks. You can opt out at any time. You must be 16 years or older and a resident of the United States.

More details : Privacy Notice | Terms of Use | Contact Us

If you're seeing this message, it means we're having trouble loading external resources on our website.

If you're behind a web filter, please make sure that the domains *.kastatic.org and *.kasandbox.org are unblocked.

To log in and use all the features of Khan Academy, please enable JavaScript in your browser.

Course: US history   >   Unit 3

• The Seven Years' War: background and combatants
• The Seven Years' War: battles and legacy
• Seven Years' War: lesson overview
• Seven Years' War
• Pontiac's uprising
• Uproar over the Stamp Act
• The Townshend Acts and the committees of correspondence

The Boston Massacre

• Prelude to revolution
• The Boston Tea Party
• The Intolerable Acts and the First Continental Congress
• Lexington and Concord
• The Second Continental Congress
• The Declaration of Independence
• Women in the American Revolution
• The American Revolution
• Boston, Massachusetts was a hotbed of radical revolutionary thought and activity leading up to 1770.
• In March 1770, British soldiers stationed in Boston opened fire on a crowd, killing five townspeople and infuriating locals.
• What became known as the Boston Massacre intensified anti-British sentiment and proved a pivotal event leading up to the American Revolution.

Boston, cradle of revolution

What do you think.

• Richard Archer, As If an Enemy’s Country: The British Occupation of Boston and the Origins of Revolution (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), xvi.
• For more, see Neil L. York, The Boston Massacre: A History with Documents (New York: Routledge, 2010).
• See Neil Longley York, "Rival Truths, Political Accommodation, and the Boston 'Massacre,'" Massachusetts Historical Review , Volume 11 (2009), 57–95.
• Hiller B. Zobel, The Boston Massacre (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1970), 301-302.

Want to join the conversation?

• Upvote Button navigates to signup page
• Downvote Button navigates to signup page
• Flag Button navigates to signup page

Drawn from MHS collections, our primary source sets promote learning in U.S. history and civics and are supported by teaching activities and guiding questions.

• Adams Family
• African Americans
• Citizenship
• Government and Civics
• NHD 2023: Frontiers in History
• Revolutionary War
• Voting Rights
• Transportation
• Early colonization and growth of colonies (up to 1754)
• Road to Revolution (1754-1775)
• Revolutionary War and a New Nation (1775-1787)
• Early Republic (1788-1815)
• Slavery, Expansion, and Reform (1816-1850)
• Civil War and Reconstruction (1850-1877)
• Industrialization, Immigration, and Empire (1876-1900)
• Progressive Era and WWI (1900-1920)
• Teacher Resources

Investigating Multiple Perspectives on the Boston Massacre

Inquiry Question 1: Although we don't know exactly what happened the night of March 5, 1770, what does the existing evidence from the Boston Massacre teach us about pre-Revolutionary America?

Inquiry Question 2: In what ways did people's political beliefs, social networks, and lived experience shape their understanding of the Boston Massacre?

The Boston Massacre, March 5, 1770

In 1768, British soldiers arrived in Boston, and lived alongside the colonists, sometimes paying to rent rooms in the colonists' houses. As British citizens, many colonists were angry to have armed regiments of the British military stationed in their city, but some colonists became friends with, and even married, soldiers.

The situation with the colonists and the soldiers grew tense and fights sometimes broke out between the two groups.  One of the worst skirmishes took place in Boston on March 5, 1770.  A crowd of angry colonists, some of them teenagers, gathered near several soldiers at the Custom House, where taxes on imported goods were paid.  The colonists shouted insults at the soldiers and began throwing rocks and snowballs at them.

As the crowd moved forward, the soldiers opened fire. Three colonists were killed on the spot, and two others died later.

Among the dead was a Black and Indigenous sailor from Massachusetts named Crispus Attucks.  Many people consider Crispus Attucks to be the first person killed in the fight for the colonies’ freedom.

Paul Revere, a Boston silversmith who was also a member of the Sons of Liberty, made a picture of the shooting and titled it The Bloody Massacre .  A massacre is the killing of many people who cannot defend themselves.  This event soon became known as the Boston Massacre, and gave energy to the colonists’ desire for independence from British rule.

The soldiers who were involved in the event were put on trial in Boston. They were defended by the lawyer John Adams, a future president of the United States. The British soldiers were acquitted of murder by a jury who determined that the soldiers had acted in self-defense.

Use our Image Comparison Tool  to compare visual representations of the Boston Massacre side-by-side. The tool contains a total of seven engravings, along with an 1801 painting that depicts the setting of the Boston Massacre, which took place in front of the old State House on State Street (then known as King Street).

For elementary students, use this slide deck to explore the sources.  

Download source set (Grades 8-12)

Customs : the government department that collects taxes on goods bought, sold, imported and exported. The “Customs House” was the building in Boston where the British government did this work, which also had a military protective presence.

Deposition : a formal recorded statement typically taken to be used in court. “Deponents” are individuals who have given this type of testimony under oath.

Propaganda : false, misleading, or biased ideas presented to an audience to gain support for a particular cause or leader. Propaganda can exist in many different forms: written, visual, verbal, etc.

Quarters : rooms that are provided for individuals to live in. In this case, “quarters” were provided for British soldiers and officers in Boston.

Regiment : a group of soldiers commanded by a colonel, who has supporting officers each in charge of smaller sub-groups of soldiers called companies. At this time, a standard British regiment had between 500-800 soldiers in it.

Siege : a military operation where an army tries to capture an area or town by surrounding it and stopping the movement of people / food / supplies.

Testimony : a formal recorded statement typically taken to be used in court.

Analysis Questions

Who is telling this account of the events surrounding the boston massacre, what is the relationship between the source creator and the events of the massacre, what purpose might have led to the creation of this source, for the two pamphlets: who is compiling these accounts and for what possible purpose, do you consider parts or the entirety of this account of the events surrounding the boston massacre to be reliable why or why not, how does this account of the events surrounding the boston massacre compare to the others you have viewed.

Created by MHS staff, Abigail Portu, and Kate Bowen

View the image with a transcript of Revere's text

A view of part of the town of Boston in New England and British ships of war landing their troops. . . On Friday Sept 30 1768 the Ships of War, armed Schooners, Transports &c Came up the Harbor and Anchored round the town, their Cannon loaded a Spring on their Cables, as for a regular Siege.

British General Thomas Gage sent regiments of British troops to Boston following protests during which Bostonians destroyed government property and threatened the British-appointed Governor Francis Bernard with physical violence. The influx of 4,000 soldiers (plus families and support staff) into a city of 16,000 was seen by some Bostonians as a punishment, interpreting the British ships of war moored off Boston’s Long Wharf as a symbolic siege , and the parades of British regiments through city streets as a show of force. Others took pride in the display of British strength. At first, troops stayed on their ships. Then, they moved into tents on Boston Common. Finally, they were quartered in Faneuil Hall, or paid Bostonians to rent out space in their warehouses, spare rooms, or homes.

Citation: A View of Part of the Town of Boston in New England and Brittish [sic] Ships of War Landing Their Troops 1768 (Original engraving by Paul Revere, 1768) Facsimile print issued by Alfred L. Sewell (Chicago, 1868), Massachusetts Historical Society,  https://www.masshist.org/database/3051 . 

Read an excerpt of Rowe's diary entries from March 5th and 6th, 1770.

5 March Monday Much snow fell too night… A Quarrell between the soldiers & Inhabitants… the 29th under the Command of Capt Preston fird on the People they killed five – wounded Several Others…Capt Preston Bears a good Character--he was taken in the night & Committed…the Inhabitants [of Boston] are greatly enraged and not without Reason

John Rowe was a politically active Boston merchant who maintained friendships with many patriots and loyalists. In his diary, Rowe recorded the years leading up to the Revolution, revealing frustration with perceived British overreach and skepticism about the violence the Sons of Liberty used to advance their cause. Rowe did not witness the Boston Massacre, but recorded what he heard and thought that night, and the next day.

Citation: John Rowe diary 7, 5-6 March 1770, pages 1073, 1076-1077, Massachusetts Historical Society,  https://www.masshist.org/database/552 .

Compare Revere's engraving side-by-side with other depictions of the Boston Massacre .

If scalding drops from rage, from anguish wrung If speechless sorrow, lab’ring for a tongue Or if a weeping world can ought appease The plaintive ghosts of victims such as these The patriot’s copious tears for each are shed A glorious tribute which embalms the dead…    The unhappy sufferers were Mesr’s Sam’l Gray, Sam’l Maverick, James Caldwell Crispus Attucks, & Patr. Carr Killed Six wounded; two of them (Christ’r Monk & John Clark) mortally.

Before the end of March 1770, Paul Revere created and published this engraving of the Boston Massacre based on the original drawing by Henry Pelham. This piece was printed throughout the colonies and remains one of the most famous images of the American Revolutionary Era. The scene is generally considered by historians to be historically inaccurate and instead a piece of propaganda against the British military. For example, Revere changed the sign for the “ Customs House” where the British government housed officials and conducted much of their business to read “Butcher’s Hall.”

Citation: The Bloody Massacre perpetrated in King Street, Boston on March 5th 1770 by a party of the 29th Regiment, Hand-colored engraving by Paul Revere, Boston, 1770, Massachusetts Historical Society,  https://www.masshist.org/database/151 .

Read the cover page in simplified language (Google slide)

A Short NARRATIVE OF The horrid Massacre in BOSTON, PERPETRATED In the Evening of the Fifth Day of March, 1770, BY Soldiers of the XXIXth Regiment ; WHICH WITH the XIVth Regiment Were then Quartered there ; WITH SOME OBSERVATIONS ON THE STATE OF THINGS PRIOR TO THAT CATASTROPHE.

​​James Bowdoin, Samuel Pemberton, and Joseph Warren (all of whom were then Boston selectmen at the time and active members of the Sons of Liberty ) collected ninety-six depositions within two weeks of the Boston Massacre. They published this pamphlet as a narrative, followed by the first-hand accounts. Copies were sent to England and distributed throughout the colonies to share their perspective on the events of March 5, 1770.

Citation: A Short Narrative of the Horrid Massacre in Boston..., Edes and Gill (Boston, 1770), Massachusetts Historical Society,  https://www.masshist.org/database/337 . 

Read the cover page in simplified language (Google Slide)

A FAIR ACCOUNT OF THE LATE Unhappy Disturbance At BOSTON in NEW ENGLAND; EXTRACTED From the DEPOSITIONS that have been made Concerning it by PERSONS of all PARTIES

Led by Lieutenant Colonel William Dalrymple of the 29th Regiment , British officers collected thirty-one witness testimonies after the Boston Massacre and shipped them to England. London lawyer Francis Maseres used those testimonies to write the narrative of events featured in this pamphlet, providing King George III and the British people with their first perspectives of the event.

Citation: A Fair Account of the Late Unhappy Disturbance at Boston in New England,  printed for B. White (London, 1770), Massachusetts Historical Society,  https://www.masshist.org/database/386 . 

Read an excerpted transcript.

Mar. 27. Joseph Whitehouse, Jane Crothers, Boston

These two pages from the marriage register of Christ Church, also known as Old North Church, record the marriage of Jane Crothers, a witness to the Boston Massacre, to Joseph Whitehouse, a British soldier of the 14th regiment , on March 27, 1770. Crothers was one of only three women who testified in the trials of Captain Thomas Preston and his soldiers. Her testimony , which was supported by others, assisted in clearing Capt. Preston of the charge of ordering his soldiers to fire into the crowd. Crothers said, “I am positive the man was not the Captain.” Instead, she said an unknown man had made the order. Her marriage to a British soldier was not mentioned during the trial.

In addition to showing the social connections between British soldiers and Bostonians, this marriage register also documents the membership and marriages of free and enslaved Black people at Old North Church.

Citation: List of marriages officiated by Rev. Mather Byles, Jr., November 1768 - February 1773, Clark's Register, 1723-1851, pages 124a and 124b, Massachusetts Historical Society,  https://www.masshist.org/database/6505 .  

Download source set (grades 8-12)

Historical Context Essay  

Download source set with context and teacher directions (grades 3-5)

The Story of the Boston Massacre and the Legacy of Crispus Attucks Google Slides (grades 3-5)

Investigating Perspectives on the Boston Massacre

Background reading.

Investigating Perspectives on the Boston Massacre: Historical Context Essay

The Townshend Acts: Fall 1767

The Boston Massacre could not have happened if British soldiers were not stationed in the city. And the soldiers would not have been there if not for the Townshend Acts–and the distrust between colonists and the customs officials charged with collecting the taxes.

Following the repeal of the Stamp Act, Parliament passed the Townshend Acts on 29 June 1767. This time, the tax came in the form of a duty on imports–including paper, glass, lead, paint, and tea–into the colonies. British legislators hoped to avoid a repeat of the colonists’ furious reaction to the Stamp Act as they pondered how to generate revenue from the colonies and remind those colonies of Parliament's right to tax—and control—them. The Acts were named for Charles Townshend, Chancellor of the Exchequer, who was—as the chief treasurer of the British Empire—in charge of economic and financial matters. With the repeal of the Stamp Act, Great Britain believed it needed money to defray the expenses of governing the colonies in America. The Acts created a new Customs Commission and punished New York for refusing to abide by the Quartering Act of 1765. 

In a series of twelve letters from a “Farmer in Pennsylvania” , John Dickinson argued that colonists were being taxed unjustly since they lacked representation in Parliament, which was their right as British subjects. Angry Bostonians committed themselves to nonconsumption, in which they refused to buy imported goods, and then many Boston merchants came together to agree on a policy of nonimportation, in which they refused to import the taxed goods.

When the customs commissioners accused John Hancock of smuggling and seized his sloop, Bostonians organized a protest in which they stoned commissioners’ houses and burned a commissioner’s racing sailboat on Boston Common. Boston’s rowdy protests terrified the commissioners. 

By the fall of 1768, following a period of timidity and indecision by Governor Bernard, the commissioners finally felt that they had some support that could be trusted: four regiments of the British Army. General Gage (in Great Britain) had sent Governor Bernard a blank form he could use to call up two regiments from Halifax (in Canada), in addition to two regiments preparing to embark from Ireland. Bernard tried desperately to lay the blame for the request of troops elsewhere, knowing how deeply unpopular their arrival would be. (previous two paragraphs adapted from Serena Zabin's  The Boston Massacre: A Family History , p.39-40)

Troops Arrive in Boston: Fall 1768

When the 14th and 29th Regiments of the British Army landed in Boston Harbor in late September 1768 (Source 1) , the Governor’s Council wanted the Regiments housed in barracks on Castle Island in Boston Harbor (7 miles by land and 3 miles by sea from the city center) but the Governor and Generals wanted the regiments quartered in the heart of Boston. Ultimately, after long negotiations, the army agreed to pay locals for the rental of private rooms and empty warehouses. For example, John Rowe rented the military one of his warehouses. 

But how would colonists and soldiers get along with one another? The soldiers – some of whom arrived with their wives and children – were a varied group, with many different hopes, skill sets, and ideas.

Bostonians were a similarly varied group:

The “Sons of Liberty” was an informal network of men opposed to the Massachusetts Governor, but not all Bostonians were steadfast opponents of British power. In 1770, they were not sorted into tidy factions of loyalist and patriot; they did not yet conceive of those terms as necessarily distinct, not diametrically opposed. They were all Britons, although they did not all agree on the best way for Britain to rule. (Zabin, Introduction)

The Boston Massacre: 5 March 1770

By the winter of 1770, clashes between civilians and soldiers of the 14th and 29th regiments, the last troops remaining in Boston, had become more frequent. After a series of clashes between soldiers and workers at John Gray's ropewalks during the weekend of 2 March, many Bostonians predicted additional trouble was to come. On the evening of 5 March, a lone sentry posted in front of the Customs House – the site where officials tasked with collecting the Townshend duties worked in the daytime – was hassled by a group of teenagers. As the crowd swelled, Captain Thomas Preston led seven soldiers from the Twenty-ninth Regiment to reinforce the sentry, but he could not persuade the growing crowd to disperse. Amidst the noise and confusion, shots were fired; three civilians were killed instantly and two more were mortally wounded. Within hours of the episode, Captain Preston and his men were in jail, and townspeople immediately demanded that the troops be removed from Boston. Newspapers scrambled to report the news of the tumultuous week and its capstone event.

The Aftermath

Today, asking, “What really happened? Who yelled ‘fire’?” is a tempting, but ultimately futile question. Hundreds of accounts and witness testimonies recorded shortly after the shooting exist, so a lack of sources is not the issue. The problem arises when one begins to read the sources: In 1770, no one could agree on what happened that night either! The street was pitch-black; street lamps (lit with an open flame) would not be imported to Boston until the beginning of 1774. Observers were stationed on the street, on balconies, on doorsteps, and inside, peering through windows. People had different vantage points and obstacles blocking their line of sight. Moreover, people had different motivations, social relationships, and prior experiences that colored their perspectives that night.  The wealthy merchant John Rowe, who had been born in England and immigrated to Boston in his 20s, had also long protested British tax policies; however, he also frequently socialized with and entertained government officials and high-ranking members of the military. His diary entry the night of the Massacre expressed how conflicted he felt about the event (Source 2) . When Paul Revere hastily created his engraving The Bloody Massacre (Source 3) , based on an engraving by Henry Pelham, he had already spent years as a member of the Sons of Liberty, publicly protesting British tax policies and the military’s presence in Boston (like the Source 1 image). Jane Crothers, a working-class woman and parishioner at Old North Church who witnessed the Massacre on the street, testified in court that Captain Preston had absolutely not been the person to yell ‘Fire!’ Was she influenced by the fact that she married Joseph Whitehouse , a soldier in the 14th Regiment, three weeks after the soldiers shot and killed five men? (Source 6) 

Three Boston selectmen–all members of the Sons of Liberty–collected depositions from people who had witnessed the event itself, and also talked to people about interactions between soldiers and civilians in the days and weeks leading up to 5 March. They published a pamphlet entitled A Short Narrative of the Horrid Massacre (Source 4) in which they used the depositions they had collected to tell a story of the soldiers’ premeditated murder of unarmed colonists. The British military also collected their own set of witness depositions, which they sent back to England to be published in a competing pamphlet entitled A Fair Account of the Late Unhappy Disturbance (Source 5). In each pamphlet, depositions make clear that Bostonians knew, worked with, lived beside, ang argued with the soldiers. Following the chaos of the snowy night on 5 March 1770, and the propaganda that followed in its wake, one thing was clear: some Bostonians may have liked–and even married–individual soldiers, but the presence of a standing army in Boston had to go. 

Works Cited

Zabin, Serena. The Boston Massacre: A Family History (2020)

Coming of the American Revolution: Boston Massacre (masshist.org)

Close Reading Questions

• Which words/phrases in the title and/or caption of his engraving supports this reading?
• How might the size and placement of British troops and ships in the engraving have caused viewers to support Paul Revere’s point of view about the arrival of the British troops?
• What does this engraving add to your understanding of the Boston Massacre?
• How does this engraving relate to Revere’s 1770 engraving of “The Bloody Massacre perpetrated in King Street” (Source 3)?

View Source .

• For whom does Rowe show sympathy in his description of the event? How do you know?
• How might Rowe’s social and economic position in Boston society have affected his perspective on the event?
• Do you find him credible? Why/why not?
• According to Rowe, in his entry on March 6, 1770, what were the immediate causes of the Boston Massacre? How did Bostonians react to it?

View Source.

• Paul Revere was a member of the Sons of Liberty. What elements of this engraving and caption would been compelling to the Sons of Liberty and their supporters?
• Consider both imagery and the ways in which Revere describes the victims and their deaths/injuries.
• What information does the title of this pamphlet give you about the events of March 5, 1770? What questions still need to be answered?
• What was the creators’ point of view of the event? Which words best show their perspective?
• What would you expect to learn from the narrative and depositions inside the pamphlet?
• How does the title of this source compare to the pamphlet printed in London ( Source 5 )?
• How does the title of this source compare to the pamphlet created from the pamphlet printed in Boston ( Source 4 )?
• How does this record of the marriage between a Bostonian and a British soldier challenge ideas about the general relationship between the two groups in 1770?
• How might Jane Crothers’ testimony in the trial of the soldiers have been affected by her as both a Bostonian and the wife of a soldier?
• How is a source like a church record different to analyze than a written / spoken testimony or diary entry? How can it support or challenge other sources you examine when looking at a historical event?

Read a transcript .

Suggested Activities – Elementary

Propaganda in Colonial Massachusetts handout

Propaganda in Colonial Massachusetts – Google Slides

This activity uses these two primary sources:

A Short Narrative of the Horrid Massacre in Boston...

A Fair Account of the Late Unhappy Disturbance at Boston in New England

Activity Overview: These sources are designed to be used before the teaching of the Boston Massacre and serve as a “hook” to develop interest in the event.  The sources are both pamphlets, designed and printed by Patriots and British officials, and include recollections from people about the events of March 5, 1770.   The pamphlets were distributed in the colony prior to the trials of the British soldiers.  

This is designed to be a teacher-guided activity where students find sourcing information from the pamphlets and draw inferences about the creators’ purposes and points of view.

Using a Plot Diagram to teach historical events

The Story of the Boston Massacre – Google slides

Activity Overview: Using a Plot Diagram on your wall or bulletin board helps students see the path that a story follows from beginning to end.  It is also a great way to reinforce elements of a story by integrating English-Language Arts skills with historical content.  Using visuals on the Plot Diagram helps students, especially English Language Learners, to remember key details.  

A plot diagram contains 5 elements: Setting, Rising Action, Climax, Falling Action, Resolution. The Google slides show how a plot diagram can be used to teach the Boston Massacre.

The Boston Massacre Close Reading: Informational Text Handout

Activity Overview:

The Close Reading handout contains two options:

• Students read and annotate an informational text to understand the context for and events of March 5, 1770.
• Students read an informational text with vocabulary supports and then write a paragraph summarizing the Boston Massacre, using three vocabulary content words in their summary.

Annotating John Rowe's diary entry Handout

Activity Overview:  Students read excerpts of a Boston merchant's diary entries for March 5 and 6, 1770. Rowe did not witness the event, but writes brief descriptions of what happened the night of the event and the next day; how the townspeople reacted to the event, and how he personally felt about it. Rowe was neutral in the Revolution, and his sympathies for both the soldiers and the victims is evident. While they read, students annotate for the: setting, emotion words, and actions. This activity will help students to have a basic overview of what happened on March 5, 1770, and in its immediate aftermath, before they read conflicting witness accounts.

Witness Testimony excerpts and chart

Optional: Fire! Voices of the Boston Massacre - YouTube (8-minute video featuring historical reinterpreters presenting witness testimony)

Activity Overview:  Working in groups, students read an excerpted testimony of one person who witnessed the Boston Massacre, taking notes on the witness’s identity. Then, they discuss whether the witness testimony supported the British soldiers or the Patriots, citing evidence for their claim. In  a share-out, students take notes on the testimonies other groups read.

The handout includes testimonies from five diverse witnesses: a free Black man; a white woman who married a British soldier three weeks after the Boston Massacre; a white nightwatchman; a white man who was neighbors with one of the British soldiers standing trial; and, an enslaved man whose enslaver was a member of the Sons of Liberty.

Suggested Activities – High School

To engage students in the topic, teachers can begin with either a “game of telephone” or a “quick sketch” to introduce students to the idea that not all primary sources are reliable or accurate.

Overview – A Game of Telephone: Come up with a selection of short phrases or statements. They can be funny or serious, related to history or not.

Have students sit or stand in a circle or straight line. They will need to be close enough so that whispering to the person next to them is possible, but not so close that other players can hear. The teacher should show or whisper the phrase to the first student, who will then relay what they heard to the next student and so forth until the final student has heard the phrase.

Students can only whisper the phrase once to the person next to them and cannot repeat it if the message was not remembered or not clear.

The last player then says what they believe the phrase to be out loud for all to hear. (For a large class, the students can be divided into two teams and each group can be given the same phrase to start and then compare which group was more accurate at the end.)

Discuss how the phrase does or does not change and the complexities of hearing and memory when it comes to repeating word for word phrases. How might this play out in history when it comes to major events? How might this play out in the modern day / in their own lives? How is this important when it comes to analyzing primary sources?

Overview – “Quick Sketch”: Select a famous historical photograph or painting.

Provide each student with a blank piece of paper and pen/pencill.

Display the image on the front board for all the students to see. Give students 60 seconds to look at the image, but do not let them draw yet.

Then, remove the image so they can no longer see it. Ask them to recreate the image on their paper (2-4 minutes).

Put the image back up on the board and discuss. What elements of the image did all/most students include? What elements were most commonly left out? Were there any elements of the image that students exaggerated, changed, or got wrong? How might memory and describing what someone saw play out in history when it comes to major events and how might it affect primary sources we analyze?

Historical Overview

Source 3: Paul Revere’s engraving, The Bloody Massacre perpetrated in King Street, Boston on March 5th 1770 by a party of the 29th Regiment (masshist.org)

Source 4: A Short Narrative of the Horrid Massacre in Boston... (masshist.org)

Source 5:   A Fair Account of the Late Unhappy Disturbance at Boston in New England (masshist.org)

Cover Art Handout

Activity Overview:  After reading the historical overview and analyzing Revere’s engraving alongside the two pamphlet covers, students will create cover art to accompany one of the two pamphlets.  Then, students explain why/how their image would support their chosen pamphlet.

“Deposition Excerpts” handout taken from:

• A Short Narrative of the Horrid Massacre in Boston... and
•   A Fair Account of the Late Unhappy Disturbance at Boston in New England 

Gallery Walk Worksheet

Gallery Walk Discussion Prompts

Teacher Prep: Read through the “Deposition Excerpts” document and select the excerpts to use with students to analyze the Boston Massacre. (Print-friendly versions of the quotes are available after the table in the document.)

Activity Overview: Students read the background historical overview and analyze the covers of Source 4: Short Narrative of the Horrid Massacre and Source 5: A Fair Account of the Late Unhappy Disturbance at Boston. Now, they are ready to dive into some of the depositions in the two pamphlets. For the gallery walk, display the selected excerpts around the room and provide students with the Gallery Walk Worksheet . Students will walk around the classroom analyzing the excerpts on their worksheet. Each of the documents gives information on a different part of the story and students will decide which perspective they believe is being supported by the document and which of the two pamphlets they believe the deposition was taken from.

At the end, students review correct answers and discuss (whole group) or write (individually) about one or more of the discussion prompts .

Boston Massacre Jigsaw Teacher Directions 

Deposition Excerpts - Jigsaw Handout

Boston Massacre Jigsaw: Student Directions

Boston Massacre Jigsaw: discussion prompts

Teacher Prep:

Choose and print deposition excerpts from the handout for students to use.

Activity Overview: Students work in groups to read excerpts from the two pamphlets containing depositions from the Boston Massacre. They then summarize the topic / issue and point of view expressed in their text set. Students will also address the credibility / accuracy of the sources they examined in their summaries. After 20 minutes, each group shares out with the whole class, and takes notes on one another’s text sets. Following the jigsaw, students can continue to discuss as a class or write individually on one or more of the discussion prompts.

“Expressing Our Opinions” Worksheet

Activity Overview: Students examine all of the ways voices and opinions are expressed today in comparison to the ways that existed in 1770 Boston. Before this activity, students should read the background historical overview. As homework, students research and think about the different ways they hear/look for news today. In class, students examine the primary sources in this set (teacher can choose which the sources) and fill out the Expressing Our Opinions Worksheet . The teacher should then facilitate a class discussion, think-pair-share, or small group discussion for students to explain their thinking and opinions.

Applicable Standards

Skill Standards Organize information and data from multiple primary and secondary sources

Analyze the purpose and point of view of each source; distinguish opinion from fact.

Evaluate the credibility, accuracy, and relevance of each source.

Argue or explain conclusions using valid reasoning and evidence

Content Standards Grade 3, Topic 6, Topic 6. Massachusetts in the 18th century through the American Revolution

Grade 5, Topic 2. Reasons for revolution, the Revolutionary War, and the formation of government

Grade 8. Topic 1. The philosophical foundations of the U.S. political system Topic 2. The development of the U.S. government Topic 4. Rights and responsibilities of citizens

US History 1, Topic 1. Origins of the Revolution and the Constitution

D2.His.4.3-5. Explain why individuals and groups during the same historical period differed in their perspectives.

D2.His.11.3-5. Infer the intended audience and purpose of a historical source from information within the source itself.

D2.His.16.3-5. Use evidence to develop a claim about the past.

D2.His.6.6-8. Analyze how people’s perspectives influenced what information is available in the historical sources they created.

D2.His.10.6-8. Detect possible limitations in the historical record based on evidence collected from different kind of historical sources.

D2.His.4.9-12. Analyze complex and interacting factors that influenced the perspectives of people during different historical eras.

D2.His.6.9-12. Analyze the ways in which the perspectives of those writing history shaped the history that they produced.

D2.His.10.9-12. Detect possible limitations in various kinds of historical evidence and differing secondary interpretations.

Use the Image Comparison Tool to compare engravings of the Boston Massacre in the MHS collections side-by-side.

Images include:

• State Street, 1801 : James Brown Marston's painting depicts the site of the Boston Massacre, in front of the old State House (then known as the Town House). "King Street" was renamed "State Street" in 1784, following the end of the Revolutionary War.
• Bingley engraving : Published by W. Bingley of London, it was based on Henry Pelham's original print and originally designed as the frontispiece for the pamphlet  A Short Narrative of the Horrid Massacre. It was also sold separately.
• Dilly engraving : Based on Henry Pelham's, this engraving was used as the frontispiece for the second edition of the pamphlet  A Short Narrative of the Horrid Massacre
• Mullikan engraving : The clockmaker Joseph Mulliken based this image on Paul Revere's engraving, and printed it in Newburyport, MA.
• Revere's 1772 woodcut engraving : Paul Revere based this image on his 1770 engraving; it was used in a broadside commemorating the Boston Massacre and was also printed in a 1772 Massachusetts almanac .  
• 1835 Hartwell woodcut : Based on Paul Revere's 1770 engraving, this image was printed in various magazines in the 1830s and '40s.
• 1856 Bufford lithograph : Unlike the earlier images that features all victims and bystanders as white, this lithograph centers Crispus Attucks, a Black and Indigenous man

Henry Pelham’s Fruits of Arbitrary Power, or the Bloody Massacre (American Antiquarian Society)

Paul Revere based his engraving of the Boston Massacre on one done first by Henry Pelham (a Bostonian and future Loyalist). View Pelham’s original engraving at the AAS website.

Explore additional primary sources related to the Boston Massacre, and the earlier death of Christopher Seider, in this digital textbook produced by the MHS.

Perspectives on the Boston Massacre - Massachusetts Historical Society (masshist.org)

Examine materials from a variety of source types to learn more about the varying perspectives and experiences regarding March 5, 1770.

Massachusetts Historical Society | Commemorating the 250th Anniversary of the Boston Massacre (masshist.org)

In 2020, the MHS organized an exhibition featuring handwritten and published sources with compelling accounts of the confrontation, the aftermath, and the trials. This website is the digital companion to the physical exhibit.

Revolutionary Spaces is a museum based at the Old State House, the site of the Boston Massacre that explores connections between the past and present.

On-site programming includes a tour on the Massacre and Memory and an exhibit entitled “Framing Mass Killings.”

Digital resources include a video called “Political Violence: From the Boston Massacre to Today” and a blog post on “The Boston Massacre and Modern Police Violence.”

Old North Church

Illuminating the Unseen | The Old North Church  From the website of Old North Church: “Illuminating the Unseen is a video series produced by Old North Illuminated that studies the histories of Black and Indigenous peoples. Written and presented by our Research Fellow, Dr. Jaimie Crumley, the series dives into Old North’s archival documents to shine a light on those who have often been excluded in the church’s broader historical narrative.”

The Occupation of 1768 and the Threat to Boston | The Old North Church & Historic Site British soldiers arrived in Boston, MA in 1768 and departed in the spring of 1770. This article situates the Boston Massacre within the timeline of the British occupation, and examines the ways in which it did and did not influence the British Parliament to withdraw troops from the city.

Boston 1775 , a blog run by Massachusetts writer J.L. Bell, specializes in the start of the American Revolution in Massachusetts.

Find posts on Newton Prince , Jane (Crothers) Whitehouse , Joseph Whitehouse , and more.

Boston 1775: Pvt. Joseph Whitehouse’s Story about Capt. Goldfinch Learn more about Joseph Whitehouse, 14th Regiment soldier and husband to Bostonian Jane Whitehouse. What did Whitehouse tell his superiors about British soldiers’ experience with Boston’s townspeople, and why might some of his accounts seem unreliable?

Boston 1775: Newton Prince: London pensioner Following the outbreak of war in MA, how did Newton Prince’s testimony related to the Boston Massacre help him secure a pension as a Loyalist living in London?

"Fire! Voices of the Boston Massacre" is an eight-minute video featuring reenactors reciting portions of actual depositions of people who witnessed the events on King Street the night of 5 March 1770. Although they all witnessed the happenings, they stood in different locations and their accounts are not consistent with one another.

The historical figures portrayed are: 

• Captain-Lieutenant John Goldfinch of the 14th Regiment (the soldiers who fired their weapons came from the 29th Regiment)
• Edward Garrick (or Gerrish), a young wigmaker’s apprentice
• Edward Payne, a merchant who lived near the Custom House, Payne was shot by a soldier but survived (the MHS has the bullets that pierced his arm)
• Newton Prince, a free Black man (a lemon merchant and pastry cook—about 35 years old)
• Jane Crothers (she married a British soldier named Joseph Whitehouse soon after the shootings)
• Charles Bourgate, a French Canadian indentured servant of Edward Manwaring
• Elizabeth Avery, a maid who lived and worked in the Custom House

Read the script (the excerpted depositions) for each historical figure.

Questions or suggestions? Contact us at [email protected] .

The Boston Massacre, 1770

March 5, 1770

The Boston Massacre was an incident in which British regulars fired into a group of Bostonians who were harassing them. It is generally considered one of the first acts of violence of the American Revolution.

This illustration depicts the Boston Massacre. Image Source: Digital Culture of Metropolitan New York .

Boston Massacre Summary

The Boston Massacre was a deadly altercation between British soldiers and a Boston mob that occurred on March 5, 1770, where the Redcoats fired on colonists, killing five and wounding six others. It was the culmination of resentment by the Boston citizenry toward British troops that Parliament had deployed in 1768 to enforce the Townshend Acts of 1767 . The incident on March 5 began when a small group of Bostonians started harassing a lone British sentry guarding the Customs House. When a crowd assembled and became more hostile, British reinforcements arrived on the scene to protect the sentry. The soldiers, under the command of Captain Thomas Preston, fired their muskets into the crowd. The first person killed was Crispus Attucks , an African-American who worked on the docks in Boston. In order to restore peace between the Redcoats and the colonists, Governor Thomas Hutchinson conducted an investigation and the soldiers were tried in court. They were defended by Founding Father John Adams and two of the soldiers were found guilty of manslaughter. In the years following the Boston Massacre, March 5 was observed as a holiday in Boston, and a memorial was held to commemorate the incident.

Boston Massacre History

The history of the Boston Massacre began long before the night of March 5, 1770. It is important to understand the Boston Massacre was not an incident that just happened one night, out of nowhere. There was a slow, steady buildup of tension between colonists living in Boston and British officials, especially Governor Francis Bernard , over British policies.

The Stamp Act Crisis and the Sons of Liberty

In 1765, Parliament passed the Stamp Act, which imposed taxes on the colonies by requiring various types of documents to be printed on paper that included a stamp on it. The paper was printed in Britain, shipped to the colonies, and had to be purchased from authorized Stamp Distributors. The colonies were outraged when news of the Stamp Act arrived, and the so-called Stamp Act Crisis began. There were protests throughout the colonies. American merchants set up trade boycotts and refused to order products from Britain and the colonial papers were full of articles that criticized the provisions of the act. The slogan, “No taxation without representation” became popular.

In Boston, a group formed that quickly gained a reputation for its harassment of British officials, which included physical violence and vandalism. Prominent members and associates of the group in Boston were Samuel Adams, Joseph Warren, James Otis Jr., and John Hancock.

The group came to be called the Sons of Liberty , and similar groups were formed in other cities, including New York, Charleston, and Philadelphia. Throughout the summer and fall of 1765, the group was responsible for publicly threatening British officials if they enforced the provisions of the Stamp Act. The Sons also coordinated riots that included mobs attacking the homes of men like Lieutenant Governor Thomas Hutchinson .

On the morning of December 17, 1765, a broadsheet was posted throughout Boston that demanded Stamp Distributor Andrew Oliver appear at the Liberty Tree at noon and announce his resignation. Oliver did as was requested, although he read his resignation from the window of a house near the Liberty Tree because it was raining.

Parliament Repeals the Stamp Act and Passes the Declaratory Act

On March 18, 1766, Parliament repealed the Stamp Act, primarily due to protests from British merchants who believed it would damage their prospects of doing business in the colonies. However, on that same day, Parliament passed the Declaratory Act , which declared Parliament had the “full power and authority to make laws and statutes of sufficient force and validity to bind the colonies and people of America, subjects of the crown of Great Britain, in all cases whatsoever.”

The Declaratory Act made it clear the threat of Parliament levying taxes on the colonies was still viable. The Sons of Liberty in Boston did not disband when the Stamp Act was repealed, they continued to meet to discuss and plan resistance to British policies. They believed Parliament was going to continue to exercise its authority — which it gave itself — to levy taxes on the colonies.

The Townshend Acts

In 1767 and 1768, Parliament did exactly as the Sons of Liberty and prominent leaders like Samuel Adams expected, when it passed a series of acts for various purposes, including establishing a flow of revenue from the colonies to Britain, tightening control over the colonial governments, and paying the salaries of royal officials in the colonies.

Collectively, they are known as the Townshend Acts and they set up a system where the officials were obligated to support the taxes because the revenue generated from them paid their salaries. The five acts were:

• The New York Restraining Act
• The Townshend Revenue Act
• The Indemnity Act
• The Commissioners of Customs Act
• The Vice-Admiralty Court Act

The Liberty Affair

To help enforce the Townshend Revenue Act and the Navigation Acts, the American Board of Customs Commissioners located in Boston. The Board of Customs played a key role in an incident with John Hancock and one of his ships. On May 9, 1768, a small ship owned by Hancock, the Liberty, arrived at the Port of Boston. It had come from Madeira, so the Customs Officials expected the ship to be full of wine.

Initially, the Customs Officials said they could not inspect the ship’s cargo, because it was too dark. They said they had to wait until the morning of May 10. When the cargo of Liberty was inspected on the morning of May 10, Customs Officials found it was carrying less than 25% of what they expected. They informed the Customs Commissioners and said could not explain where the other 75% of the cargo went. They said they watched the ship all through the night of the 9th and did not see any cargo taken off the ship. One of those officials was Thomas Kirk, who would change his story two weeks later.

On May 17, the HMS Romney , a British man-of-war, arrived in Boston Harbor. The ship was under the command of Captain John Corner. Corner sent press gangs onshore to force sailors into service on the Romney . Merchants and smugglers avoided Boston Harbor, for fear of losing crew members. However, the presence of the Romney and Corner’s press gangs increased tension between the townspeople and British officials, but likely made Thomas Kirk feel like he could tell the truth about what happened on the night he was supposed to inspect the Liberty .

On June 9, the situation grew worse when Kirk changed his testimony about what happened on the night of May 9. He told Joseph Harrison, the Collector of the Port of Boston, that the Captain of the Liberty had offered him a bribe and the Liberty was, in fact, smuggling extra casks of wine. Harrison took the new information to the Board of Customs Commissioners. 

Harrison, along with other British officials, including Comptroller Benjamin Hallowell were warned by members of the Sons of Liberty to leave Hancock’s ship alone. The warning was ignored, and on June 10, David Lisle, the Solicitor General to the Board of Customs, ordered the Liberty to be seized. Sailors from the Romney were sent to carry out the task.

A crowd gathered and some of them tried to convince the British officials to leave the Liberty alone, at least until John Hancock could arrive on the scene. Harrison and Hallowell declined and a fight broke out while the sailors towed the Liberty away and moored it near the Romney.

Harrison and Hallowell fled the scene. However, the crowd at the dock, which had grown to around 3,000 people, chased after them. When the crowd was unable to find them, they went to the homes of the two men and smashed in the windows. After that, they went back to the dock and pulled Harrison’s boat out of the water. They dragged it through the streets to Boston Common where they set it on fire and burned it to the ground.

The seizure of the Liberty caused unrest in Boston because many people believed it had been illegally taken. Rumors started to circulate that people from all around Boston were planning to “begin an insurrection.”

Boston’s political leaders sent a letter to the colony’s agent — or representative — in London, Dennys De Berndt. The letter placed the blame for the incident on the Townshend Acts and Parliament’s continued efforts to raise taxes from the colonies. It also compared the Customs Officers and Commissioners to thieves who stole from the people of Massachusetts.

The Customs Commissioners also expressed concerns that an uprising was imminent in a letter they sent to London. They accused the local assemblies of coordinating efforts to resist British policies and believed if there was an uprising in Boston it would spread to other colonies. They suggested the only way to stop an uprising was to send troops to Boston to occupy the town.

Governor Francis Bernard also sent a detailed narrative of the incident to William Legge, Lord Hillsborough, the Secretary of State for the Colonies. Bernard urged Hillsborough to do something to help prevent an uprising because he believed the colonists were capable of insurrection.

Ultimately, Hancock was taken to court by the Customs Commissioners, where he was defended by John Adams. Although the charges against Hancock were eventually dismissed, he did lose the Liberty , which was purchased by the Customs Commissioners and used to patrol the waters off Rhode Island for smugglers.

Military Occupation of Boston

In order to restore order in Boston, prevent an uprising, and enforce the provisions of the Townshend Acts, British troops were sent to Boston to occupy the town. Governor Bernard had asked for troops as early as 1766 due to the unrest and his request was finally granted. The American Customs Board of Commissioners also asked for troops to help them enforce the Townshend Acts in the aftermath of the Liberty Affair. Ships carrying troops arrived on September 28, 1768. On October 1, the troops disembarked and were quartered at various locations throughout the town.

For several months, the monthly Boston Town Meeting discussed the problem of troops occupying the city during peacetime. During the meetings, the officials in Boston and Massachusetts questioned the legality of housing a standing army during a time of peace. They argued it was a violation of the Massachusetts Constitution, the and English Bill of Rights. They believed it would certainly be seen as illegal if it was done in London.

Joseph Warren Comes Into the Spotlight

In March 1769, the Boston Town Meeting adopted a petition to the King, asking for the removal of the troops. At the same meeting, Joseph Warren was appointed to a committee to clear the town from the false accusations that had been made, in regards to rebellion and loyalty to the Crown. The members of the committee were James Otis, Samuel Adams, Thomas Cushing , Richard Dana, Joseph Warren, John Adams, and Samuel Quincy.

John Adams was not as involved as some of the others during this time. He was more cautious about becoming too involved with the unrest. He wrote: “I was solicited to go to the Town Meetings and harangue there. This I constantly refused. My friend Dr. Warren the most frequently urged me to this: My Answer to him always was ‘That way madness lies.’. . . he always smiled and said, ‘it was true.’”

Bernard Replaced and Some Troops Leave Boston

On July 21, 1769, Governor Bernard left Boston and returned to England. He was replaced by Thomas Hutchinson, a native of Massachusetts.

Soon after Bernard left Boston, two regiments — the 64th and 65th — were removed from the city. The 14th Regiment and 29th Regiment remained. Despite the reduction in the number of troops that were quartered in the city, the activities the troops indulged in made matters worse with the citizens of Boston. Some of the issues were:

• British officers paraded their troops through the streets on a frequent basis.
• On Sundays, the troops would race their horses through the streets.

On top of those things, off-duty soldiers were often employed by businesses in the city when they were off duty. The residents of Boston who needed jobs accused the soldiers of taking their jobs.

The people of Boston retaliated by insulting and teasing the troops, which would sometimes lead to arguments or even fights.

The Death of Christopher Seider

On February 22, 1770, a mob gathered outside the home of a Customs Official Ebeneezer Richardson. The people were upset that Richardson had broken up a protest in front of the shop owned by Theophilus Lillie, a Loyalist merchant.

The crowd turned violent and threw rocks through the windows of Richardson’s house. One of them hit Richardson’s wife. When that happened, Richardson grabbed his gun and fired into the crowd. 11-year-old Christopher Seider was shot twice, once in the arm and once in the head.

After the boy died, his body was taken to Joseph Warren for an autopsy. Warren found the body contained, “eleven shot or plugs, about the bigness of large peas.”

Warren’s autopsy confirmed the boy was indeed killed by Richardson’s weapon. Some consider the boy to be the first casualty of the American Revolution.

Samuel Adams arranged for Seider’s funeral and a public display was made of what Richardson had done. An estimated 2,000 people attended the funeral at the Granary Burial Ground which fueled the outrage of the people of Boston.

Incident on March 2, 1770

On March 2, a British soldier, Private Patrick Walker, was walking along Gray’s Ropewalk in Boston, looking for a job. A Boston rope maker, William Green, asked Walker if he was looking for work. When Walker said he was, Green told him he could clean the public toilet. Walker was offended and told Green, “Empty it yourself.”

When the two exchanged heated words, Walker tried to hit Green. One of Walker’s employees knocked Green down. When Walker was able to get to his feet, he went to the barracks and gathered some friends. He returned to the scene with a handful of soldiers and they were looking for a fight.

When the rope makers saw them, they gathered to help defend Walker and then roughly 40 soldiers arrived on the scene. The crowd of rope makers included Samuel Gray and, possibly, Crispus Attucks. A full-scale riot broke out and the rope makers forced the British soldiers to return to their barracks.

The Boston Massacre — March 5, 1770

On the morning of March 5, the news of Christopher Seider’s death appeared in the Boston Gazette . That night, an altercation between a British soldier, Private Hugh White, and a 13-year-old boy, Edward Garrick exploded into violence.

The incident started when Garrick insulted Captain Lieutenant John Goldfinch. Goldfinch ignored the boy, but Private White, who was nearby at his post, demanded the boy apologize to Goldfinch. Garrick refused, and words were exchanged. Then Garrick poked Goldfinch in the chest, which led to White hitting the boy in the head with his musket. Garrick’s friend, Bartholomew Broaders, started arguing with White, which drew the attention of more people. The crowd grew and included Boston bookseller Henry Knox.

The officer in charge of the night’s watch, Captain Thomas Preston, was alerted to the trouble and sent an officer and six privates to assist White. Preston ordered the troops to fix bayonets and went with them to the scene. By the time they arrived, the crowd had grown to more than 300 people.

The commotion and shouting led to the church bells being sounded, which usually meant there was a fire. More people came running to the scene, including John Adams.

The crowd started throwing snowballs, ice, rocks, and other things at the troops. Private Hugh Montgomery was hit with something and dropped his musket. When he picked it back up, he fired into the crowd, even though Preston had not given an order to fire. Montgomery’s discharge struck and killed Crispus Attucks . Within moments, the other troops panicked and fired into the crowd. When the shooting was over, five were dead, and six were wounded. Along with Attucks, the others killed by British fire were Samuel Gray, Patrick Carr, James Caldwell, and Samuel Maverick.

The crowd backed away and Preston called soldiers from the 29th Regiment out. The British took defensive positions in front of the Town House to protect themselves from the mob. Governor Hutchinson was called out to help restore order. Hutchinson promised the mob there would be an investigation into the incident, but only if the mob dispersed. The mob did break up.

During the melee, Warren was called to the scene to tend to the wounded. Later, he recalled the incident and wrote: “The horrors of that dreadful night are but too deeply impressed on our hearts. Language is too feeble to paint the emotions of our souls, when our streets were stained with the blood of our brethren, when our ears were wounded by the groans of the dying, and our eyes were tormented by the sight of the mangled bodies of the dead.”

Warren continued, and made it clear he believed that British troops firing on British citizens was a final straw, “To arms! we snatched our weapons, almost resolved, by one decisive stroke, to avenge the death of our slaughtered brethren, and to secure from future danger all that we held most dear.”

Samuel Adams dubbed the incident “The Boston Massacre.”

Boston Massacre Outcome

Before the mob broke up, the Patriot leaders sent express riders to neighboring towns to inform them of what happened. On the morning of March 6, people from the towns and countryside went into Boston and gathered at Faneuil Hall. According to Hutchinson, they were “in a perfect frenzy.”

A delegation of prominent city leaders was chosen to go to Governor Hutchinson and ask for the immediate removal of the troops. Warren was one of the members of the delegation, along with Samuel Adams and John Hancock. Hutchinson had the troops moved out to Castle William in the harbor.

Official Report — A Short Narrative of the Horrid Massacre

A week later, the Boston Committee of Safety organized a committee, which included Warren, to investigate the incident. Warren wrote the report for the committee, which was called “A Short Narrative of the Horrid Massacre in Boston.” The report blamed Parliament for what happened because of the situation it had put the troops in.

The report said, “As they were the procuring cause of the troops being sent hither, they must therefore be the remote and blameable cause of all the disturbances and bloodshed that have taken place in consequence of that measure.”

The report was published as a pamphlet and included an appendix with 96 depositions. It was sent to Britain to ensure the government received the American viewpoint of what was happening in Boston.

Boston Massacre Trials

Captain Preston and his men were eventually tried in court for the accusations made against them in regard to the incident. John Adams defended them in court, along with Josiah Quincy, Jr., Sampson Salter Blowers, and Robert Auchmuty.

Preston’s trial started on October 24, 1770. He was found not guilty on October 30.

The trial of the eight soldiers from the 29th regiment started on November 27. The jury reached its verdict on December 5. Six of the soldiers were acquitted. Hugh Montgomery and Matthew Kilroy were found guilty of manslaughter. Montgomery and Kilroy were branded with the letter “M” — for manslaughter — on their hands, where the palm meets the thumb.

Repeal of the Townshend Acts

After the Boston Massacre, the situation calmed down in Boston, especially since the troops had been moved to Castle William.

On March 5, the same day the news of Christopher Seider’s death was printed in the Boston Gazette and the Boston Massacre took place, Lord North made a motion in the House of Commons to partially repeal the Townshend Acts.

On April 12, 1770, Parliament voted to repeal the taxes levied by the Townshend Acts, except for the tax on tea.

After the repeal of the Townshend Acts, many of the Patriots toned down their involvement in political affairs. However, Joseph Warren and Samuel Adams continued to write in the papers and warned people that it was only a matter of time before Parliament would start levying taxes and infringing on their rights again.

Boston Massacre Memorials

In the years following the Boston Massacre, May 5 was a holiday in Boston and a memorial was held to commemorate the incident. Each year, a prominent member of the community was chosen to deliver a speech, which would be printed in the papers.

Massacre Day 1772

In 1772, the committee that selected the speaker unanimously chose Joseph Warren. He delivered his speech at the Old South Church, and it marked the first time he spoke publicly before a large audience. An estimated 5,000 people were in attendance. Warren used the opportunity to give a passionate speech that criticized Parliament and he called on the people to defend their rights against oppressive British policies.

Warren’s speech was a huge success with the Patriot faction and was printed in the papers throughout the colonies.

Massacre Day 1775

In 1775, as March 5 approached, rumors spread through Boston that British officers were threatening violence against whoever delivered the Massacre Day speech. Once again, Joseph Warren delivered the speech from the pulpit at Old South Church. The church was so full that Warren had to use a ladder to climb in through a window a the back of the pulpit. Roughly 40 British officers were seated in the front rows and some of them were even on the steps leading to the pulpit. They intended to harass Warren during the speech. Warren’s friends, who were also in attendance and scattered throughout the church, feared for his life and were prepared to react at a moment’s notice to protect him.

Warren delivered the speech dressed in a white Roman toga, which was meant to be a symbol of liberty. His speech lasted for roughly 35 minutes. Warren delivered a speech that clearly laid out that Parliament had no right to tax the colonies without their consent and criticized it for the “baleful influence of standing armies in time of peace.” He pointed out that Britain had made a significant change in its colonials policies, starting with the Sugar Act, when it decided to pass legislation for the purpose of raising revenue.

One of the more famous quotes from his speech was, “Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God.”

Within six weeks, British troops marched to Concord, by way of Lexington, where they were met by Massachusetts Minutemen under the command of Captain John Parker . When Parker and his men refused to lay down their weapons — even though they were dispersing, as ordered by British officer Major John Pitcairn — a shot was fired. Within moments, British troops and American Minutemen were firing on each other and the War for Independence had begun.

Boston Massacre Significance

The Boston Massacre was an important event in American history because British troops fired on and killed American colonists. Because of that, it is commonly referred to as the “First Bloodshed of the American Revolution.”

Boston Massacre APUSH Notes and Study Guide

The APUSH Study Guide for the Boston Massacre l has been moved to a new page and expanded.

• Written by Randal Rust

The Boston Massacre

The Boston Massacre marked the moment when political tensions between British soldiers and American colonists turned deadly. Patriots argued the event was the massacre of civilians perpetrated by the British Army, while loyalists argued that it was an unfortunate accident, the result of self-defense of the British soldiers from a threatening and dangerous mob. Regardless of what actually happened, the event fanned the flames of political discord and ignited a series of events that would eventually lead to American independence. John Adams believed that “on that night, the foundation of American independence was laid.”  

Following the end of the French and Indian War , Great Britain began to levy taxes on her colonies to defray the cost of the expensive war. However, colonies who had been in charge of taxing themselves began to openly resist Great Britain. Decades of self-rule and benign neglect had many colonists feeling their liberty was being stripped away by their mother country.  Boston was the home to some of the most radical opponents and largest protests. In an attempt to use an excessive amount of force to crack down on these upstart colonials, Great Britain passed the Townshend Acts in 1767 and dispatched the British Army to restore order in Boston.  On October 1, 1768, the British fleet arrived, and hundreds of British soldiers marched into the hostile city.

Rather than restore order, this maneuver proved to only worsen relations between the British and Americans. The presence of British regular troops in the streets of Boston enraged colonists, who now felt they were being occupied by a foreign army. British soldiers faced numerous insults and taunting as they patrolled the streets.  The verbal abuse soon became physical as fights between civilians and British soldiers became common in the streets of Boston.  Angry mobs would frequently protest British soldiers or American loyalists who supported the British policies. In February of 1770, Christopher Seider, an 11-year-old boy, was killed while protesting with a group in front of the home of a loyalist.  Thousands of Bostonians turned out for the boy’s funeral and the tension and distrust between the civilians and the British grew larger.

It was just eleven days after Seider’s death, on March 5, 1770, when Private Hugh White of the 29 th  Regiment of Foot took up a sentry post outside of the Customs House on King Street. The Customs House had taken on symbolic meaning as the center of British taxation. As a young wigmaker’s apprentice, Edward Garrick, passed the sentry, he yelled at a British officer that he had not paid his bill for a wig. The sentry, White, reprimanded the young man. The two engaged in a heated conversation when Private White swung his musket at Garrick, hitting him on the side of the head.

Word traveled through the streets about the altercation and a large mob began to descend on the lone British sentry at the Custom House. As the mob of people began to grow larger and larger, the sentry called for reinforcements. Seven British soldiers of the 29 th  Regiment of Foot, under the command of Captain Thomas Preston, marched to the sentry’s defense with fixed bayonets.  As the nine British soldiers stood guard near the steps to the Custom House, passions enflamed and dozens of more people joined the crowd surrounding the soldiers. Bells began ringing in the city and more people came out of their homes and into the streets. The crowd was estimated to have grown to as many as 300 or 400 people. They were yelling at the soldiers, shouting profanities and insults at the soldiers. Others threw rocks, paddles, and snowballs at the besieged men.  One of those protestors near the soldiers was a former slave named Crispus Attucks . The crowd continued to hurl verbal abuse and challenged the soldiers repeatedly to fire their weapons. Preston’s men loaded their muskets in front of the crowd.

The crowd became angrier and angrier. At one point a club or stick was thrown at the soldiers and struck one of the British soldiers.  The soldier fell to the ground. He stood back up and yelled, “Damn you, fire!” and fired his musket into the crowd. The musket ball struck Attucks who fell dead to the ground. A few seconds later, the other British soldiers fired into the crowd.  Eleven people were hit, five men were killed and six were wounded. After the smoke cleared, Preston ordered his men to cease fire and called out dozens of soldiers to defend the Custom House.

Most of the crowd of civilians left the area immediately around the soldiers as others ran to help the wounded. American blood had been spilled at the hands of British soldiers for the first time.  Royal governor Thomas Hutchison arrived on the scene and calmed the anxious and angry colonists and promised justice for what had just occurred. The next day Preston and the eight soldiers involved were arrested and sent to trial for murder.

Following the event, patriot Paul Revere made an engraving based on an illustration by Henry Pelham of the event and labeled it with the provocative title: “The Bloody Massacre.” The image depicted a line of British soldiers firing in unison on an unarmed crowd in front of the State House. This incendiary image outraged many colonists as the event soon became known as a massacre. Broadsides depicting black coffins for the men killed in the incident appeared in newspapers. The funerals for these victims became large public events where patriots displayed their anger at the occupying soldiers.

As public sentiment against the British soldiers grew, Massachusetts placed the soldiers on trial for murder. It became very difficult to find someone who would be willing to publicly defend the British soldiers. Then patriot John Adams agreed to defend them. Despite the public backlash to his defense of the British soldiers, Adams believed it was important to show the British that a fair trial could be held in the colony of Massachusetts, despite the inflamed passions. After a heated trial, Adams was ultimately victorious in showing the British soldiers were not at fault and had acted in self-defense. Six soldiers were found not guilty and two were found guilty of the lesser charge of manslaughter.

The Boston Massacre was one of the most important events leading up to the Revolutionary War.  The tragic event was commemorated annually in Boston with orations that further fueled negative views of the British soldiers living amongst them. With the large amounts of distrust between the colonists and British soldiers, Massachusetts citizens would need to look to their own defense against possible aggression by the British Army. The two would finally clash five years after the event at Lexington and Concord outside Boston. Almost 50 years after the fact, John Adams described the importance of these events: “How slightly however, historians, may have passed over this event, the blood of the Martyrs, right, or wrong, proved to be the seeds of the Congregation. Not the Battle of Lexington or Bunkers Hill ; not the surrender of Burgoyne , or Cornwallis , were more important events in American history than the battle of King Street, on the 5th of March 1770.”

Want to learn more? Watch our  Boston Massacre: Animated Graphic Novel 

Further Reading

• John Adams Under Fire: The Founding Father's Fight for Justice in the Boston Massacre Murder Trial   By: Dan Abrams and David Fisher 
• The Boston Massacre   By: Thomas Fleming 
• American Rebels: How the Hancock, Adams, and Quincy Families Fanned the Flames of Revolution   By: Nina Sankovitch
• The Boston Massacre: A Family History   By: Serena Zabin

Tea: Brewing a Revolution

The Tipping Point: The Boston Tea Party

The British East India Company

You may also like.

American Revolution: The Boston Massacre

• M.A., History, University of Delaware
• M.S., Information and Library Science, Drexel University
• B.A., History and Political Science, Pennsylvania State University

In the years following the French and Indian War , the Parliament increasingly sought ways to alleviate the financial burden caused by the conflict. Assessing methods for raising funds, it was decided to levy new taxes on the American colonies with the goal of offsetting some of the cost for their defense. The first of these, the Sugar Act of 1764 , was quickly met by outrage from colonial leaders who claimed "taxation without representation," as they had no members of Parliament to represent their interests. The following year, Parliament passed the Stamp Act which called for tax stamps to be placed on all paper goods sold in the colonies. The first attempt to apply a direct tax to the North American colonies, the Stamp Act was met with widespread protests.

Across the colonies, new protest groups, known as the " Sons of Liberty " formed to fight the new tax. Uniting in the fall of 1765, colonial leaders appealed to Parliament stating that as they had no representation in Parliament, the tax was unconstitutional and against their rights as Englishmen. These efforts led to the Stamp Act's repeal in 1766, though Parliament quickly issued the Declaratory Act which stated that they retained the power to tax the colonies. Still seeking additional revenue, Parliament passed the Townshend Acts in June 1767. These placed indirect taxes on various commodities such as lead, paper, paint, glass, and tea. Again citing taxation without representation, the Massachusetts legislature sent a circular letter to their counterparts in the other colonies asking them to join in resisting the new taxes.

London Responds

In London, the Colonial Secretary, Lord Hillsborough, responded by directing colonial governor to dissolve their legislatures if they responded to the circular letter. Sent in April 1768, this directive also ordered the Massachusetts legislature to rescind the letter. In Boston, customs officials began to feel increasingly threatened which led their chief, Charles Paxton, to request a military presence in the city. Arriving in May, HMS Romney (50 guns) took up a station in the harbor and immediately angered Boston's citizens when it began impressing sailors and intercepting smugglers. Romney was joined that fall by four infantry regiments which were dispatched to the city by General Thomas Gage . While two were withdrawn the following year, the 14th and 29th Regiments of Foot remained in 1770. As military forces began to occupy Boston, colonial leaders organized boycotts of the taxed goods in an effort to resist the Townshend Acts.

The Mob Forms

Tensions in Boston remained high in 1770 and worsened on February 22 when young Christopher Seider was killed by Ebenezer Richardson. A customs official, Richardson had randomly fired into a mob that had gathered outside his house hoping to make it disperse. Following a large funeral, arranged by Sons of Liberty leader Samuel Adams , Seider was interred at the Granary Burying Ground. His death, along with a burst of anti-British propaganda, badly inflamed the situation in the city and led many to seek confrontations with British soldiers. On the night of March 5, Edward Garrick, a young wigmaker's apprentice, accosted Captain Lieutenant John Goldfinch near the Custom House and claimed that the officer had not paid his debts. Having settled his account, Goldfinch ignored the taunt.

This exchange was witnessed by Private Hugh White who was standing guard at the Custom House. Leaving his post, White exchanged insults with Garrick before striking him in the head with his musket . As Garrick fell, his friend, Bartholomew Broaders, took up the argument. With tempers rising, the two men created a scene and a crowd began to gather. In an effort to quiet the situation, local book merchant Henry Knox informed White that if he fired his weapon he would be killed. Withdrawing to safety of the Custom House stairs, White awaited aid. Nearby, Captain Thomas Preston received word of White's predicament from a runner.

Blood on the Streets

Gathering a small force, Preston departed for the Custom House. Pushing through the growing crowd, Preston reached White and directed his eight men to form a semi-circle near the steps. Approaching the British captain, Knox implored him to control his men and reiterated his earlier warning that if his men fired he would be killed. Understanding the delicate nature of the situation, Preston responded that he was aware of that fact. As Preston yelled at the crowd to disperse, he and his men were pelted with rocks, ice, and snow. Seeking to provoke a confrontation, many in the crowd repeatedly yelled "Fire!" Standing before his men, Preston was approached by Richard Palmes, a local innkeeper, who inquired if the soldiers' weapons were loaded. Preston confirmed that they were but also indicated that he was unlikely to order them to fire as he was standing in front of them.

Shortly thereafter, Private Hugh Montgomery was hit with an object that caused him to fall and drop his musket. Angered, he recovered his weapon and yelled "Damn you, fire!" before shooting into the mob. After a brief pause, his compatriots began firing into the crowd though Preston had not given orders to do so. In the course of the firing, eleven were hit with three being killed instantly. These victims were James Caldwell, Samuel Gray, and Crispus Attucks . Two of the wounded, Samuel Maverick and Patrick Carr, died later. In the wake of the firing, the crowd withdrew to the neighboring streets while elements of the 29th Foot moved to Preston's aid. Arriving on the scene, Acting Governor Thomas Hutchinson worked to restore order.

Immediately beginning an investigation, Hutchison bowed to public pressure and directed that British troops be withdrawn to Castle Island. While the victims were laid to rest with great public fanfare, Preston and his men were arrested on March 27. Along with four locals, they were charged with murder. As tensions in the city remained dangerously high, Hutchinson worked to delay their trial until later in the year. Through the summer, a propaganda war was waged between the Patriots and Loyalists as each side tried to influence opinion abroad. Eager to build support for their cause, the colonial legislature endeavored to ensure that the accused received a fair trial. After several notable Loyalist attorneys refused to defend Preston and his men, the task was accepted by well-known Patriot lawyer John Adams .

To assist in the defense , Adams selected Sons of Liberty leader Josiah Quincy II, with the organization's consent, and Loyalist Robert Auchmuty. They were opposed by Massachusetts Solicitor General Samuel Quincy and Robert Treat Paine. Tried separately from his men, Preston faced the court in October. After his defense team convinced the jury that he had not ordered his men to fire, he was acquitted. The following month, his men went to court. During the trial, Adams argued that if the soldiers were threatened by the mob, they had a legal right to defend themselves. He also pointed out that if they were provoked, but not threatened, the most they could be guilty of was manslaughter. Accepting his logic, the jury convicted Montgomery and Private Matthew Kilroy of manslaughter and acquitted the rest. Invoking the benefit of clergy, the two men were publicly branded on the thumb rather than imprisoned.

Following the trials, tension in Boston remained high. Ironically, on March 5, the same day as the massacre, Lord North introduced a bill in Parliament that called for a partial repeal of the Townshend Acts. With the situation in the colonies reaching a critical point, Parliament eliminated most aspects of the Townshend Acts in April 1770, but left a tax on tea. Despite this, conflict continued to brew. It would come to head in 1774 following the Tea Act and the Boston Tea Party . In the months after the latter, Parliament passed a series of punitive laws, dubbed the Intolerable Acts , which set the colonies and Britain firmly on the path to war. The American Revolution would begin on April 19, 1775, when to two sides first clashed at Lexington and Concord .

• Massachusetts Historical Society: The Boston Massacre
• Boston Massacre Trials
• iBoston: Boston Massacre
• American Revolution: Boston Tea Party
• American Revolution: The Townshend Acts
• American Revolution: The Intolerable Acts
• Major Events That Led to the American Revolution
• Questions Left by The Boston Massacre
• American Revolution: The Stamp Act of 1765
• Crispus Attucks, the Boston Massacre Hero
• Why Did John Adams Defend Captain Preston After the Boston Massacre?
• What Was the Sugar Act? Definition and History
• John Hancock: Founding Father With a Famous Signature
• Continental Congress: History, Significance, and Purpose
• All About the Sons of Liberty
• American Revolution: General Thomas Gage
• Biography of Samuel Adams, Revolutionary Activist and Philosopher
• The Declaration of Independence
• An Introduction to the American Revolutionary War

• South Portland School Department
• Digital Learning Commons
• American Revolution
• Boston Massacre
• No Taxation Without Representation
• Boston Tea Party
• Intolerable/Coercive Acts
• Continental Congress
• British and Loyalists
• Native Americans
• African Americans
• Lexington & Concord, April 1775
• Bunker Hill, June 1775
• Quebec, December 1775
• Long Island, August 1776
• Trenton, December 1776
• Saratoga, October 1777
• Yorktown, October 1781
• Weapons & Uniforms
• George Washington
• Thomas Jefferson
• Benjamin Franklin
• Alexander Hamilton
• James Madison
• King George III
• Benedict Arnold
• Articles of Confederation
• Federalist Papers
• Declaration of Independence
• Constitution
• Bill of Rights

Old State House, site of the Boston Massacre

• Beyond the Mythology of The Boston Massacre Explores the mythology of the Boston Massacre, Paul Revere's engraving of the event, and the rise of lawyer, and future-President, John Adams.
• What Really Happened In The Boston Massacre? Interview with author and professor of history Eric Hinderacker about the differing published accounts of the Boston Massacre.
• John Adams and the Boston Massacre Trial of 1770 Links to court proceedings (primary sources) from the Boston Massacre Trial.
• Boston Massacre Trial Brief overview of the Boston Massacre Trial. Citation... Hide... “Boston Massacre Trial.” National Parks Service , U.S. Department of the Interior, www.nps.gov/bost/learn/historyculture/massacre-trial.htm.

Primary Sources

• History of the Boston Massacre, March 5, 1770 History of the Boston Massacre, March 5, 1770. Consisting of the narrative of the town, the trial of the soldiers: and a historical introduction, containing unpublished documents of John Adams, and explanatory notes. Citation... Hide... Kidder, Frederic, et al. History of the Boston Massacre, March 5, 1770: consisting of the narrative of the town, the trial of the soldiers, and a historical introduction, containing unpublished documents of John Adams, and explanatory notes. J. Munsell, 1870, www.loc.gov/law/help/rare-books/pdf/john_adams_1870_history.pdf.
• Perspectives on the Boston Massacre Fantastic resource from the Massachusetts Historical Society. Provides history of the Boston Massacre, primary documents, reactions at the time, information on the trial, and much more. Citation... Hide... “Perspectives on the Boston Massacre.” Massachusetts Historical Society, www.masshist.org/features/massacre/visual.
• A Fair Account of the Late Unhappy Disturbance at Boston Pamphlet published recounting the British side of the Boston Massacre. Citation... Hide... A fair account of the late unhappy disturbance at Boston: in New England ; extracted from the depositions that have been made concerning it ... With an appendix .. London, B. White, 1770, books.google.com/books?id=bKtbAAAAQAAJ.
• A Short Narrative of the Horrid Massacre in Boston Pamphlet published recounting the Bostonian's side of the Boston Massacre. Citation... Hide... Doggett, John, et al. A Short narrative of the horrid massacre in Boston: perpetrated in the evening of the fifth day of March, 1770, by soldiers of the 29th Regiment, which with the 14th Regiment were then quartered there: with some observations on the state of things prior to that catastrophe. Boston, Messrs. Edes and Gill, 1770, books.google.com/books?id=catbAAAAQAAJ.

• << Previous: No Taxation Without Representation
• Next: Boston Tea Party >>
• Last Updated: Dec 12, 2023 12:34 PM
• URL: https://libguides.spsd.org/americanrevolution

The Boston Massacre

Written by: Bill of Rights Institute

By the end of this section, you will:.

• Explain how British colonial policies regarding North America led to the Revolutionary War

Suggested Sequencing

Use this Narrative with the Stamp Act Resistance Narrative and The Boston Tea Party Narrative following the Acts of Parliament Lesson to show the growing tensions between England and the colonies.

In late 1767, Parliament passed the Townshend Acts, which taxed the colonists on purchases of British lead, glass, paint, paper, and tea. The British also headquartered customs officials in Boston to collect the new round of taxes and enforce trade regulations more stringently. The colonists could buy only British goods, and now those goods were hit with tariffs that meant there was no limit to Parliament’s taxing power, because the colonists were forbidden to manufacture many of their own goods.

Colonial reaction was swift. John Dickinson wrote in Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania that if Parliament succeeded in “taking money out of our pockets without our consent . . . our boasted liberty is but . . . a sound and nothing else.” Massachusetts sent other colonies a circular letter drafted by Samuel Adams denouncing the taxes. In Williamsburg, George Mason and George Washington followed the example of other colonies by creating an agreement not to import any British goods. Throughout the colonies, women held spinning bees, gatherings in their homes where they made homespun clothing as a symbol of republican simplicity to replace imported luxuries.

Bostonians protested the taxes in the streets, assembled at town meetings, and threatened customs officials, leading Royal Governor Francis Bernard to dissolve the assembly. The British also dispatched four thousand redcoats as a show of force to pacify the city. Many colonists considered the peacetime presence of this standing army, which their legislatures did not invite, a grave threat to their liberties and a gross violation of the 1689 English Bill of Rights. Its presence strained an already tense atmosphere. John Adams, cousin of Samuel Adams, wrote later that the troops’ “very appearance in Boston was a strong proof to me, that the determination in Great Britain to subjugate us was too deep and inveterate ever to be altered by us.” Fights erupted in taverns and streets as mobs of townspeople wielded insults, clubs, swords, and shovels against redcoats armed with bayonets.

On the morning of February 22, 1770, a crowd of hundreds threatened a merchant, Theophilus Lillie, who had violated the boycott of British goods. After Lillie’s neighbor, Ebenezer Richardson, rushed to his aid, the throng chased Richardson, who retreated inside his own house. The crowd lobbed taunts and rotten food. As his windows shattered, Richardson fired into the crowd, killing an eleven-year-old boy. The mob seized Richardson, beat him senseless, and nearly hanged him. Samuel Adams used the incident to portray the dead boy as a martyr to British tyranny and organized a funeral procession attended by thousands.

A few days later, near the customs house, a group of hostile boys insulted a young sentry who responded by smashing the butt of his musket into a boy’s head. The church bells tolled, bringing hundreds of citizens into the streets to pelt the sentry with snowballs, rocks, and ice. Captain Thomas Preston marched a few men out to relieve the sentry, forming a line and ordering the crowd to disperse. In the skirmishes that followed, one soldier was knocked down by a club; he rose and discharged his musket. The rest of the soldiers fired a volley that struck eleven Bostonians, instantly killing three and mortally wounding two more. Preston and his men were jailed that night, and the rest of the troops relocated to a fort in Boston harbor, narrowly averting a full-scale battle.

Patriot leaders seized on the “massacre” for a public relations victory. The British government – responsible for protecting its subjects’ rights to life, liberty, and property – in the years since the French and Indian War had seemed to seize colonists’ property and curtail their liberty; now its soldiers had taken their lives. Ten thousand mourners attended the funeral procession staged by Samuel Adams. Silversmith Paul Revere contributed an engraving showing bloodthirsty soldiers firing at innocent civilians; it was mostly propaganda but served to galvanize many colonists’ feelings about British oppression.

Why would Paul Revere’s engraving of the Boston Massacre rouse colonists toward the Patriot cause?

John Adams, then a practicing lawyer, defended the British soldiers in court, an unpopular decision that nevertheless defined his stand for justice and the rule of law. Preston was judged not to have given an order to fire and was acquitted. Most of the soldiers were also acquitted on the grounds of self-defense. Adams had proved that in the colonies, the law was supreme. He staked his public reputation and Patriot credentials on the principle that the traditional rights of Englishmen were deserved by all, even hated British soldiers who had slain five colonists. His courageous act contributed to a relative calm that lasted a few years. Meanwhile, Parliament revoked the hated Townshend Acts, except, fatefully, the tax on tea.

Review Questions

1. Which of the following methods was not used by colonists to protest the Acts passed by Parliament after the French and Indian War?

• Boycotting British imports such as textiles
• Publishing written arguments in newspapers and pamphlets
• Antagonizing British soldiers in the streets with verbal and physical attacks
• Forming militia and securing funds to declare a war for independence

2. The Boston Massacre refers to

• the period when mobs frequently wounded or killed British soldiers in the streets of Boston because the soldiers were viewed as symbols of British tyranny
• the episode in which a Boston mob attacked British soldiers who then fired into the crowd, killing five colonists
• the period when the British enforced the Stamp, Sugar, Tea, and Townshend Acts on the colonies
• the funerals held for murdered colonists that thousands of Bostonians attended to demonstrate solidarity against the British

3. Which of the following provides an example of colonists participating in an economic protest against the Townsend Acts?

• Well-known leaders like John Dickinson writing circular letters in protest
• Women creating homespun clothes instead of purchasing imported goods
• An organization called the Sons of Liberty burning effigies in public
• Protestors dressing up like American Indians and dumping tea into the harbor

4. What was the effect of the Boston Massacre engraving and funeral procession in other colonies?

• Patriots in other colonies interpreted the Boston event as a danger to all colonies.
• Newspapers barely reported the events and few colonists took notice.
• Loyalists were impressed by the successful actions taken by the British to regain control.
• Immediate actions were taken to create an intercolonial body that would protest these actions.

5. What was John Adams’ intention when he defended the British redcoats involved in the Boston Massacre?

• Adams was a fierce Loyalist who believed the crown had absolute authority in the colonies and desired to prove the redcoats had committed no crime.
• Adams wanted each redcoat to suffer the consequences of his murderous actions.
• Adams desired to prove that the colonists, regardless of their political rage, would always uphold the rule of law.
• Adams longed for a position as a lawyer in Great Britain and knew this case could fulfill his dream.

6. Which of the following was Britain’s direct response to the Boston Massacre?

• Passage of the Declaratory Act, reasserting British jurisdiction over the colonies
• Closing of Boston Harbor in retaliation for colonial economic protest
• Repeal of all Townsend Act taxes except the one on tea
• Awarding of religious freedom to French-Canadian colonists under British rule

7. Which of the following best contextualizes the Boston Massacre?

• British declared that each purchased paper item would require a stamp tax.
• The Proclamation of 1763 prohibited settlement west of the Appalachian Mountains.
• Rowdy colonists dressed as American Indians and poured East India Tea into the harbor.
• British customs officials were headquartered in Boston to enforce the newly declared Townsend Acts.

Free Response Questions

• Briefly summarize the interactions between the British government and North American colonists that led to the Boston Massacre.
• Explain how John Adams’s defense of British troops in Boston demonstrated the strength of the rule of law in colonial America.

AP Practice Questions

“And thereupon the said Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons, pursuant to their respective letters and elections, being now assembled in a full and free representative of this nation, taking into their most serious consideration the best means for attaining the ends aforesaid, do in the first place (as their ancestors in like case have usually done) for the vindicating and asserting their ancient rights and liberties declare That the pretended power of suspending the laws or the execution of laws by regal authority without consent of Parliament is illegal; That the pretended power of dispensing with laws or the execution of laws by regal authority, as it hath been assumed and exercised of late, is illegal; That the commission for erecting the late Court of Commissioners for Ecclesiastical Causes, and all other commissions and courts of like nature, are illegal and pernicious; That levying money for or to the use of the Crown by pretence of prerogative, without grant of Parliament, for longer time, or in other manner than the same is or shall be granted, is illegal; That it is the right of the subjects to petition the king, and all commitments and prosecutions for such petitioning are illegal; That the raising or keeping a standing army within the kingdom in time of peace, unless it be with consent of Parliament, is against law.”

English Bill of Rights, 1689

1. The principle expressed in the English Bill of Rights that contributed most to the tensions in Boston was

• the right of petition should not be denied
• a standing army should not be kept among them during a time of peace
• the king should not suspend or ignore laws
• special courts should not be convened

2. Taken as a whole, the English Bill of Rights most clearly demonstrates the British belief in the principle of

• due process
• regal authority
• the rule of law
• the common good

“The mob still increased and were more outrageous, striking their clubs or bludgeons one against another, and calling out, come on you rascals, you bloody backs, you lobster scoundrels, fire if you dare, G-d damn you, fire and be damned. . . . At this time I was between the soldiers and the mob, parleying with, and endeavouring all in my power to persuade them to retire peaceably, but to no purpose. . . . On this a general attack was made on the men by a great number of heavy clubs and snowballs being thrown at them, by which all our lives were in imminent danger, some persons at the same time from behind calling out, damn your bloods-why don’t you fire. Instantly three or four of the soldiers fired, one after another, and directly after three more in the same confusion and hurry. The mob then ran away, except three unhappy men who instantly expired, in which number was Mr. Gray at whose rope-walk the prior quarrels took place; one more is since dead, three others are dangerously, and four slightly wounded. The whole of this melancholy affair was transacted in almost 20 minutes. 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; that my words were, don’t fire, stop your firing.”

Captain Prescott, Account of the Boston Massacre, 1770

3. The excerpt gives historians insight into the

• likelihood that authors who opposed British policy exploited the event for political gain by omitting certain details
• strict discipline was observed by all redcoats assigned to Boston even in tense situations
• health care provided to those injured during conflict regardless of race or social status
• nonviolent protest strategies colonists used to decry perceived British injustice

4. An important consequence of the account described in the excerpt was that the

• British soldiers were acquitted on the grounds of self-defense
• British soldiers were reprimanded in colonial courts and then executed
• Colonial vigilantes took to the streets to silence any further discussion of the massacre
• Colonial minutemen began stockpiling weapons for a retaliatory offensive

5. Which of the following best describes a reaction to the event described in the excerpt?

• Colonists along the Atlantic seaboard realized the tense circumstances caused unnecessary death and vowed to restore order in their cities.
• British parliament was so moved by the Captain’s words that it ordered his troops to escort the funeral for those unfairly slain.
• Patriots used the event to galvanize citizens by producing images and rhetoric.
• Imperial rivals, such as France and Spain, sent letters of caution to Great Britain encouraging it to reduce the force used in the colonies.

Primary Sources

“Biography of John Adams. The Boston Massacre.” American History. University of Groningen. http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/biographies/john-adams/the-boston-massacre.php

Chappel, Alonzo. Boston Massacre . Printed 1878 The Miriam and Ira D. Wallach Division of Art, Prints and Photographs: Print Collection, The New York Public Library. http://digitalcollections.nypl.org/items/510d47da-e8e9-a3d9-e040-e00a18064a99

Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History. Paul Revere’s engraving of the Boston Massacre, 1770. https://gilderlehrman.org/history-by-era/road-revolution/resources/paul-revere%E2%80%99s-engraving-boston-massacre-1770

Suggested Resources

Archer, Richard. As If an Enemy’s Country: The British Occupation of Boston and the Origins of Revolution . Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.

McCullough, David. John Adams . New York: Simon & Schuster, 2001.

Middlekauff, Robert. The Glorious Cause: The American Revolution, 1763-1789 . New York: Oxford University Press, 1982.

Zobel, Hiller B. The Boston Massacre . New York: Norton, 1970.

Related Content

Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness

In our resource history is presented through a series of narratives, primary sources, and point-counterpoint debates that invites students to participate in the ongoing conversation about the American experiment.

• Skip to global NPS navigation
• Skip to this park navigation
• Skip to the main content
• Skip to this park information section
• Skip to the footer section

Exiting nps.gov

Alerts in effect, boston massacre trial.

Last updated: February 26, 2015

Park footer

Contact info, mailing address:.

Boston National Historical Park 21 Second Ave Charlestown, MA 02129

617 242-5601

Stay Connected

Ohio State nav bar

The Ohio State University website

• BuckeyeLink
• Find People
• Search Ohio State

The Boston Massacre

• Michael Kraemer

On the night of March 5, 1770, a man and a British sentry exchanged heated words in Boston, Massachusetts. Within minutes, three people lay dead in the snow and several others were injured, two fatally. This event, popularly referred to as the “Boston Massacre,” was a turning-point in relations between American colonists and British authorities, and provided one of the sparks that would ignite the American Revolution.

Written by Michael Kraemer. Narration by Dr. Nicholas B. Breyfogle. Video production by Cody Patton, Laura Seeger, and Dr. Nicholas B. Breyfogle.

MA in American History : Apply now and enroll in graduate courses with top historians this summer!

• AP US History Study Guide
• History U: Courses for High School Students
• History School: Summer Enrichment
• Lesson Plans
• Classroom Resources
• Spotlights on Primary Sources
• Professional Development (Academic Year)
• Professional Development (Summer)
• Book Breaks
• Inside the Vault
• Self-Paced Courses
• Browse All Resources
• Search by Issue
• Search by Essay
• Become a Member (Free)
• Monthly Offer (Free for Members)
• Program Information
• Scholarships and Financial Aid
• Applying and Enrolling
• Eligibility (In-Person)
• EduHam Online
• Hamilton Cast Read Alongs
• Official Website
• Press Coverage
• Veterans Legacy Program
• The Declaration at 250
• Black Lives in the Founding Era
• Celebrating American Historical Holidays
• Browse All Programs
• Donate Items to the Collection
• Search Our Catalog
• Research Guides
• Rights and Reproductions
• See Our Documents on Display
• Bring an Exhibition to Your Organization
• Interactive Exhibitions Online
• About the Transcription Program
• Civil War Letters
• Founding Era Newspapers
• College Fellowships in American History
• Scholarly Fellowship Program
• Richard Gilder History Prize
• David McCullough Essay Prize
• Affiliate School Scholarships
• Nominate a Teacher
• Eligibility
• State Winners
• National Winners
• Gilder Lehrman Lincoln Prize
• Gilder Lehrman Military History Prize
• George Washington Prize
• Frederick Douglass Book Prize
• Our Mission and History
• Annual Report
• Contact Information
• Student Advisory Council
• Teacher Advisory Council
• Board of Trustees
• Remembering Richard Gilder
• President's Council
• Scholarly Advisory Board
• Internships
• Our Partners
• Press Releases

History Resources

The Boston Massacre

By elizabeth berlin taylor, introduction.

In this lesson, students will be asked to learn the disputed and agreed-upon facts of the Boston Massacre in small groups and then discuss them and propose a website definition of the Massacre as a class. This lesson should not only provide students with an opportunity to look at disparate representations of so-called historical facts surrounding a very famous event that preceded the American Revolution, but will also teach them to deliberate with their classmates in a cordial fashion.

On the night of March 5, 1770, American colonists attacked British soldiers in Boston, which resulted in the soldiers firing on the crowd and killing five of the colonists. This event became known as the Boston Massacre, a rallying point for colonists against the stationing and quartering of British troops throughout the colonies, and against the Townshend Acts, which the British soldiers were deployed to enforce. Many different accounts of this encounter are extant as John Adams successfully defended the British soldiers in court and thus had to depose numerous witnesses.

Primary Sources

"The Bloody Massacre," by Paul Revere (PDF)

Deposition of Theodore Bliss , Boston Massacre Historical Society

Captain Thomas Preston’s Account of the Boston Massacre , Boston Massacre Historical Society

" The Soldiers Trial: October 24 to 30, 1770: Selected Testimony ," The University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law, Famous Trials Project

Summation of John Adams , The University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law, Famous Trials Project

Anonymous Account of the Massacre , The University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law, Famous Trials Project

Secondary Source

Library of Congress "America’s Library" site for kids, which gives a brief overview of the Boston Massacre.

Essential Question

What really transpired on the night of March 5, 1770?

• Students will be able to read and understand primary documents that are key to understanding the Boston Massacre and the ensuing trials of the British troops and their captain.
• Students will be able to identify similarities and differences between primary source documents.
• Students will be able to discuss the Boston Massacre as a class to decide what they think actually occurred.
• Students will be able to propose and vote on a definition for the Boston Massacre for a history website for elementary school students.

Motivation: Give students five minutes to read over the information at the "America’s Library" site. After that time, ask students to close their computers, or, if using a print copy, collect that copy. Ask students to remember as many details about the Massacre as they can from the site. The teacher should record the facts on the board as they are announced by the students so that they are visible to the entire class.

After the motivation has provided a basic understanding of the events of the Boston Massacre, inform the students that for the rest of the class they are going to be history detectives and decide what they think really happened in the Boston Massacre.

Project the famous Paul Revere engraving "The Bloody Massacre," and ask students a variety of questions about what they see:

• What do you see in this engraving?
• How are the colonists portrayed?
• How are the British soldiers portrayed?
• According to this engraving, who is at fault in this Massacre? How do you know?

As students identify that the engraving seems to put the British soldiers at fault for the Boston Massacre, the teacher will inform them that they are going to read a variety of other documents and decide if Paul Revere was conveying the truth about the circumstances of the event.

Put students into eight groups of four. The members of each group will analyze the same document, as the primary sources are fairly challenging reading. Give each group a packet that includes copies of one of the following: the Deposition of Theodore Bliss, Captain Thomas Preston’s Account of the Boston Massacre, the Summation of John Adams, and the Anonymous Account of the Massacre. Students will read and analyze their group’s document, noting at the bottom of the handout five of the described events.

Students will jigsaw so that they will be in a new group in which each member reads a separate article. The students will fill in the attached worksheet that asks them to find events that were discussed in more than one source. Also, students will write a summary of what they think took place during the Boston Massacre. Each group will choose a spokesperson who will read a brief explanation to the class of what they think happened.

The teacher will request the input of up to three of the groups and then summarize the work that was done in that period.

(This can also be an optional extension of the prior lesson.)

Students will briefly review the facts that they think are true about the Boston Massacre, referring to their previously read articles and the worksheet they completed with their second group.

The teacher will then pose the question, "If we were going to make a website for elementary school students about the Boston Massacre, what should the site say?" The class will decide this question by having a whole-class discussion.

Each student will get two popsicle sticks. When the student wishes to speak, he or she will raise her stick and then turn it in as he or she speaks. Thus, each student will have at most two opportunities to speak during the discussion. The teacher will need to guide the discussion by asking the following questions (and by recording the answers where they can be seen by the entire class):

• Can we agree as a class upon what actually happened during the Boston Massacre?
• What seems certainly to be true? Why?
• What might be true?
• What do you think is certainly untrue? Why?
• How should we write our definition for a website?
• What should we include and what should we omit?

The teacher should stress that the goal of the class is to come up with a well-written and historically accurate definition of the Boston Massacre for a website.

Debrief the discussion. What are some of the benefits and drawbacks of that method of decision making in a piece of writing? Was it hard to come up with a definition? Are you pleased with the definition you wrote?

Students can create a podcast about the Boston Massacre that uses the class definition. Another extension would be to have students create a website on the American Revolution and use the class definition as a page in the site.

Stay up to date, and subscribe to our quarterly newsletter.

Learn how the Institute impacts history education through our work guiding teachers, energizing students, and supporting research.

Home — Essay Samples — History — Boston Massacre — The Role of the Boston Massacre in American History

The Role of The Boston Massacre in American History

• Categories: American History Boston Massacre John Adams

About this sample

Words: 757 |

Published: Sep 1, 2020

Words: 757 | Pages: 2 | 4 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Verified writer

• Expert in: History

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

3 pages / 1308 words

2 pages / 821 words

2 pages / 792 words

2 pages / 961 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Boston Massacre

In conclusion, the Boston Massacre was not an isolated incident, but rather the result of a complex web of political, economic, and social factors. The presence of British troops, the imposition of taxes, the struggle for [...]

“Liberty, once lost, is lost forever.” As one of the founding fathers, John Adams played a very important role in the journey to America’s freedom and its initial start as a country. As the second president, many expected big [...]

By the late 18th century, tensions in Colonial America were running high. Despite colonists coming to America to start anew and to escape from under British rule, the British Parliament still maintained a strong foothold over [...]

One of the more impactful means by which the experience of war is recreated for a civilian audience is through the illustration of the human body, with lived experience and relevant literature illustrating war as an entity so [...]

Cotton was often considered the foundation of the Confederacy. The question this essay will examine is ‘To what extent did cotton affect the outbreak of the Civil War.’In order to properly address the demands of this questions, [...]

The trials took place in colonial massachusetts. A few young girls were claiming to be possessed by the devil and suspicions began to grow. This caused many people to grow frantic and in order to settle this franticness, a [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

The Boston Massacre Essay Example

The evening of March 5, 1770, an uproar happened in Massachusetts known as the Boston Massacre. The occasion brought about the passing of five American colonists. Do every one of the occasions that happened equivalent to a genuine "massacre" however? The Boston town discharged a paper titled, "A Short Narrative of the Horrific Massacre." Afterward, everybody knew about it as the Boston Massacre however it was anything but a massacre by any means. This essay will talk about the historical backdrop of what occurred in advance, the occasion of the Boston Massacre and the contention of why it isn’t really a massacre. The Boston Massacre is seen with overpowering bias and numerous inconsistencies in records exist, the "Boston Massacre" is better characterized as a massacre over a genuine riot. The Soldiers were incited to flame upon the group, and the genuine extent of the incitement could be a lot more prominent than a considerable lot of the Patriotic observers testified. Numerous inconsistencies exist in the proof, and without appropriate confirmation, one must accept the Soldiers and the Captain to be innocent until demonstrated guilty.

The "massacre" began with the British troops shooting at colonists. People who name this as a massacre are just seeing one side of a two-sided story. The Boston Massacre was not a slaughter, yet a shared uproar. The nearness of the British Soldiers was not invited by the Bostonians for quite a while and it made the British feel undermined, driving them to act in self-protection. The settlers were vexed for some time because of the British organizing new taxes on tea, glass, paper, paint, and lead. About five years prior to the riot, the general population of Boston had been challenging British tax collection with both the Stamp Act and after that against the Townshend Acts. These occasions that happened may have foreshadowed the "massacre." During the morning of February 22nd, 1770 viciousness radiated all through Massachusetts due to boycotting items influencing the Townshend obligations.  As the crowd shouted hurtful slurs at Ebenezer Richardson, an informer for the customs service, he fired into the crowding killing an eleven-year-old boy who died from a gunshot to this abdomen. John Adams wrote, “My eyes never beheld such a funeral.” It was obvious tension was rapidly rising between Bostonians and British soldiers, leading up to the night of March 5th.

The day of the Boston Massacre is simply the most imperative day in light of the fact that the day itself clarifies why it was anything but a massacre. Now, the settlers were angry with the British since they were attempting to implement the Townshend Act. There was a misguided judgment the British were the first to begin the showdown. This was false because the colonists began tossing things at the troopers. For example rocks, sticks and snowballs. Clearly the British were irritated by this, however, Captain Thomas Preston gave a request to his fighters and instructed them not to flame. For a weird reason, his words were misheard and every one of the officers began firing into the group of colonists. Five passings were recorded. A contention discussed with the Boston Massacre is that individuals thought about whether the officers terminated without order. This was settled when Captain Preston gave his announcement of what he saw.

Captain Preston's record makes reference to how he saw the crowd of Bostonians beginning to shape and after that, they started harassing his troopers. He says he advised his group to overlook the comments yet the assaults started to get increasingly horrendous and the Bostonians continued to get progressively forceful. Rather than utilizing just verbal activities, they began tossing rocks and snowballs. Now, Captain Preston advised the group to arm their weapons and be set up to discharge on his directions. The British soldiers felt undermined as though they expected to ensured themselves. Somebody yelled out to flame yet it was not Captain Preston, it was Teddi DeCanio. The soldiers started firing while Captain Preston shouted and requested answers from his fighters. The officers were befuddled too and told the Captain they thought he requested them to shoot. This uproar was trailed by the British troops promptly prosecuted.

The main question that basically all observers of this topic wonder is whether Captain Preston requested his soldiers to fire. There is proof on either side, and this makes much debate. Witnesses, for example, Robert Goddard, Isaac Pierce, Daniel Calef, and the soldiers at the Massacre guarantee that the Captain gave such requests. Robert Goddard guaranteed that “Immediately [Captain Preston] said Fire upon which the Soldiers stood for a short space. The officer then said ‘Damn your Blood fire.’” We can find William Wyatt supporting this with his quotation, "[Captain Preston] then said Damn your bloods fire..." We can discover William Wyatt supporting this with his citation, "[Captain Preston] then said Damn your bloods fire..." On the opposite side of the story, James Woodall resistant cases that "I am sure [Captain Preston] did not give the word fire."

Matthew Murray likewise states that "I heard no order given." While little can be decisively decided without having been at the Massacre, it very well may be resolved that such uproar would not happen in a tranquil circumstance where the fighters basically began shooting on the group. All things considered, one can conclude from the events that there was absolutely a riot occurring. In court, the jury found two of the men and Captain Preston not liable but rather the other two officers were discovered liable of homicide. The Bostonians gave a few proclamations off what happened contradicted to Captain Preston's announcement. After the jury found the two men liable of the acts then it was clear what the fact of the matter was. 

Concluding every one of the certainties, the occasion occurred on March 5, 1770, was a long way from a massacre and increasingly like a riot. The certainties state how the Bostonians never acknowledged the British. With them not being acknowledged, it made the British feel uncomfortable. The Bostonians assaulted the soldiers verbally and physically on a few events before the riot named the Boston Massacre, which drove the British to act in self-protection.

The wild crowd played a part as they exclaimed fire which made the British wrongly fire. Toward the finish of the preliminary, it was demonstrated the Bostonians began the immense riot. John Adams, attorney for the British soldiers, had extraordinary fulfillment when on preliminary. He was quoted as he looked back at the trials as saying, “The part I took in defense of Captain Preston and the Soldiers, procured me Anxiety, and Obloquy enough. It was, however, one of the most gallant, generous, manly and disinterested actions of my whole life, and one of the best pieces of service I ever rendered my Country. Judgment of death against those soldiers would have been as foul a stain upon this Country as the executions of the Quakers or witches, anciently. As the Evidence was, the verdict of the jury was exactly right.”

Despite the fact that the testimony introduced at the trial is biased towards the British, it very well may be added that the word riot is more suitable for the occasions taken place that night. Whatever the reason for the riot, the occasions of the Boston Massacre were totally vital as they molded the United States of America. Observing the occasions of the Boston Massacre is to demonstrate a troublesome assignment for our age as it will for who and what is to come. Just by being at the site of the riot might one be able to have precisely concluded the occasions of the night.

Related Samples

• Diocletian And Constantine Essay Example
• The Life of Queen Elizabeth I Essay Sample
• History Essay Sample on The World War II: The United States And The Soviet Union
• The Role of Cleopatra Essay Example
• Essay Sample on Cartography: The Impact of Map Making on the Civil War
• The Worst Dictators of the 20th Century Essay Example
• Is Brutus Tragic Hero Essay Example 2
• The Market Revolution Essay Example
• Positive and Negative Effects of The Industrial Revolution Essay Example 2
• Joseph Stalin as the Most Influential Person of the 20th Century (Free Essay Sample)

Didn't find the perfect sample?

You can order a custom paper by our expert writers

Creative local students win historical essay and video contests

RIDGEFIELD – Three high school students from Vancouver and Ridgefield displayed their creativity in winning first place in the Fort Vancouver Sons of The American Revolution Chapter’s 2024 Eagle Scout Essay, Knight Essay and youth video contests. Each contest challenged the high school students to research and write about or produce a video featuring a compelling person from the American Revolution. Each winner received a $100 award and certificate for their achievement at the local level and advanced to the state level for further competition.

Josephine Abbott, a Seton High School junior, wrote a descriptive essay about Cherokee Nation War Chief Dragging Canoe and his many efforts to lead his people during the American Revolution. Abbott’s entry in the SAR Arthur M. and Berdena King Eagle Scout Essay Contest earned a first-place finish at the local level. Abbott had a special connection to her essay subject as she is the eighth great-granddaughter of Chief Dragging Canoe. In addition to writing her essay, Abbott was required to prepare a four-generation family lineage chart and document her many accomplishments as an Eagle Scout.

Elizabeth Swift, a Ridgefield High School senior, also choose a Native American as the subject for her George S. and Stella M. Knight Essay Contest entry. Nicholas Cusick was a member of the Tuscarora tribe, which supported the American patriots’ cause during the Revolution. He served with French Marquis de Lafayette as an interpreter and guide, and for his service he was granted a pension after the war. Swift’s essay on Cusick also earned her second place at state this year and a $500 award.

Lincoln Swift, a sophomore at Ridgefield High School, used video to tell the story of Patrick Carr, an Irish immigrant and leather worker, who was one of the victims of the Boston Massacre. Swift choreographed Carr’s tragic story with the use of stick puppets. Swift’s three-minute video not only won accolades at the local level, it earned him first place in the Washington State SAR Society Youth Video Contest. Swift received a $1,000 award and certificate for first place.

“These three contests challenge high school students to research and document important events and people from the American Revolution,” said Fort Vancouver SAR Chapter President Paul Winter. “In fact, we have programs designed for students at the elementary school level up through high school. Each program encourages the students to be creative, have some fun, and, as in the case of our Eagle Scout this year, find personal connections to the struggle for independence.”

Related Stories