Tags

, , ,


The bloody massacre perpetrated in King Street Boston on March 5th 1770 by a party of the 29th Regt. Engrav'd Printed & Sold by Paul Revere Boston, 1770

The bloody massacre perpetrated in King Street Boston on March 5th 1770 by a party of the 29th Regt. Engrav’d Printed & Sold by Paul Revere Boston, 1770

The Boston Massacre occurred on March 5, 1770, and was really not a massacre at all, but it was called so to unite the colonists in hatred of Great Britain.

It all started after Private Hugh White of the British army was insulted by a wigmaker’s apprentice, and a large crowd gathered to witness it and insult White. White called out for assistants, and Captain Thomas Preston, the officer of the watch, arrived with six men to relieve White. Preston called on the crowd to disperse. Instead, the crowd threw small objects and spit on them, taunting the soldiers who held their fire. Preston commanded his men not to fire until he said so, but Private Hugh Montgomery was thrown off balance by an object, and gave the “order” to fire, doing so himself. The shots were disorganized and periodic, but by the time it stopped three colonists were dead, and two more would die of their injuries. The first man to die was Crispus Attucks. Acting governor Thomas Hutchinson of Massachusetts then dispersed the crowd personally.

Preston and his soldiers were then investigated and tried, and were defended by John Adams, the future President. Adams successfully defended the soldiers, and Preston and six others were acquitted. However, two were convicted of manslaughter because of obvious evidence of them firing their weapons. Five colonists were put on trial as well, but were all acquitted.

The Boston Massacre certainty did unite the colonists against Britain, but it was caused by both sides, not just one. It was a stepping-stone towards the American Revolution that would gain America its independence. What do you think would’ve happened if both sides were more reasonable?

Advertisements