1

The Origins of the American Revolution

Lesson 3: “The Bloody Massacre on King Street”

U.S. History I: Grades 9-12 (Advanced Placement)

By Sean Lawler, Education Program Coordinator of the Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum

2

Table of Contents 3

Introduction to the Topic...... 3

Overview of Lesson 3: “The Bloody Massacre on King Street”…………………………………………………4

Common Core Standards Addressed in Lesson 3………………………………………………………………………5

Background to the “Bloody Massacre on King Street”………………………………………..…………………6-9

Engravings of the Boston Massacre………………………………………………………………………….………..10-12

Primary Source: Benjamin Edes’ Account of the Massacre………………………………….…..………..12-14

Primary Source: By Francis Maseres’ Account of the Boston Massacre…………………………….15-17

Boston Massacre Trial…………………………………………………………………………..…………………………………18

Classroom Trial Activity………………………………………………………………………….……………………………….19

3

Introduction to the Topic

When colonists participated in the Stamp Act Riots of 1765, few dreamed of a united American nation, separate of British rule and influence. In the years that followed, the policies of successive administrations in England, coupled with the occupation of Boston by the British Army gradually steered people in the direction of outright rebellion. It would be almost ten years before the first open conflict between the British Army and provincial militiamen took place at the battles of Lexington and Concord. Even then, it was unclear to many what the American nation might look like. Many colonists—patriots included—hoped for reconciliation with the mother country even after the first battle.

In the late 1760’s, few if any believed the British North American colonies could survive on their own. What started as a movement for Parliamentary reform, turned into a social revolution. By 1770, hostilities were mounting between the Crown and the colonies. For almost two years, the British Army had been occupying Boston to curb popular demonstration, and to enforce law and order. The reasons cited for the occupation of Boston by the English administration was the town’s proclivity to mob violence. On at least two occasions, riots ensued in reaction to news of impending taxes. On one occasion, John Hancock refused to abide by customs laws, and in doing so, physically assaulted customs officers of the Crown. This convinced Parliament that something had to be done about the growing tensions in Boston.

The first regiments of the King’s Army arrived in Boston on October 1, 1768. With much ceremony, they marched through the streets of Boston, and camped out on Boston Common. But from the moment the boots were on the ground in Massachusetts, there was undeniable friction between the town’s populace, and the occupying force. The soldiers were underpaid, and needed other sources of income to supplement their meager salaries. With two thousand regulars occupying a town that was already in the grips of an economic downturn, the inhabitants of Boston had their hands full, and their pocketbooks empty paying for the soldier’s upkeep. This friction between the town’s inhabitants, and the British regulars led to a bloody massacre on King Street on March 5, 1770. The Boston Massacre, and the fallout from the tragic event, will be the subject of this lesson plan.

In the lesson that follows, your students will read a secondary source which outlines the origins of the Boston Massacre, and how a perfect storm of street brawls and town disputes led to the tragic event. After that, your students will explore two engravings of the Boston Massacre by Henry Pelham and Paul Revere, and analyze how one of the renderings was an effective piece of patriot propaganda. Finally, your class will read two primary sources of the Boston Massacre from the perspective of a patriot newspaper printer, and a loyalist. From these readings, your students will be able to discern the differences between the primary sources, and which one more accurately fits into the secondary source material. 4

Overview of Lesson 3: “The Bloody Massacre on King Street”

Brief Overview: Students will explore the origins of the American Revolution by examining the causes of the Boston Massacre, and how this event pushed Boston towards revolution.

Prior Knowledge: Students should understand the origins of the conflict including the Acts of taxation that preceded the Boston Massacre, and the ways in which the colonists resisted the authority of Parliament and King George III.

Estimated Time: 45 minutes (1 class period)

Content Area/ Course: U.S. History I

Unit: The American Revolution

Lesson: Causes of the American Revolution

Overview: Students will be able to describe the causes of the American Revolution by examining the friction between the occupying British Army, and the citizens of Boston.

By the end of this lesson, students will know and be able to:

Explain the causal political and social factors leading up to the Boston Massacre.

Describe how the Boston Massacre, and the propaganda created by patriots following the Boston Massacre, became the catalyst for the American Revolution.

Essential Question Addressed in this lesson:

How did the Boston Massacre galvanize support for the Sons of Liberty, and how did this become a causal factor of the American Revolution?

5

Common Core Standards Addressed in Lesson 3: “The Boston Massacre”

Standard(s) and Unit Goal(s) to be addressed in this lesson:

MA History and Social Studies Curriculum Framework Standards

USI.4: Analyze how Americans resisted British policies before 1775 and analyze the reasons for American victory and the British defeat during the Revolutionary war. (H)

USI.5: Explain the role of Massachusetts in the Revolution, including important events that took place in Massachusetts and important leaders from Massachusetts. (H)

A. The Boston Massacre B. The Boston Tea Party C. The Battles of Lexington and Concord and Bunker Hill D. Samuel Adams, John Adams, and John Hancock

MA English Language Arts Curriculum Framework Standards

ELA 9-10.RH.4: Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, including vocabulary describing political, social, or economic aspects of history/ social studies.

ELA 6-8.RH2: Determine the central ideas or information of a primary source; provide an accurate summary of the source distinct from prior knowledge or opinions.

ELA9-10.SL.2: Integrate multiple sources of information presented in diverse media or formats (e.g., visually, quantitatively, orally) evaluating the credibility and accuracy of each source.

ELA9-10.SL.3: Evaluate a speaker’s point of view, reasoning, and use of evidence and rhetoric, identifying any fallacious reasoning or exaggerated or distorted evidence.

ELA 9-10.SL.4: Present information, findings, and supporting evidence clearly, concisely, and logically such that listeners can follow the line of reasoning and the organization, development, substance, and style are appropriate to purpose, audience, and task.

6

“The Bloody Massacre on King Street” 7 Background

Instructions: Have your students read the following article on the origins of the Boston Massacre. Once finished, have them assess the engravings by Henry Pelham and Paul Revere using the Common Core I See/ It Means chart. Finally, have your class read the two primary documents from the Tory (loyalist), and patriot perspective of the Boston Massacre, and answer the questions that follow. Optional: Have your students conduct their own Boston Massacre Trial using the arguments set forth in Classroom Trial at the end of this document.

When news of the impending Stamp Act reached Boston in August of 1765, the town rioted to such an extent that government officials no longer felt safe. The Loyal Nine, a secret society that was the predecessor organization of the Sons of Liberty, started it all. On the morning of August 14, 1765, two members of the Loyal Nine hung an effigy of the appointed Stamp Master, Andrew Oliver from the Liberty Tree. By noon that day, over one thousand people had gathered beneath the Liberty Tree to hurl insults at the effigy. Later on, someone ripped the effigy from the Liberty Tree, and dragged it to Andrew Oliver’s house. For the remainder of the day, and into the night, the mob tore apart Andrew Oliver’s house. The next day, Andrew Oliver fled town, and resigned his post as Stamp Master.

In spite of the claims of Andrew Oliver, Royal Governor Francis Bernard, and Lieutenant Governor Thomas Hutchinson, there was a method to the madness. The Loyal Nine tore apart the houses of government officials as an intimidation tactic. Since the British Army was too far away to strike against the rioters, bullying the government seemed to be an effective means of resistance. On August 26, 1765, the Loyal Nine struck again. This time they razed the house of Lieutenant Governor Thomas Hutchinson, going so far as to remove the cupola from his roof, and destroy a book that Hutchinson was writing on the history of Massachusetts Bay Colony.

The unpopularity of the Stamp Act in the North American Colonies convinced Parliament that there had to be another way to raise revenue. They repealed the Stamp Act in 1766, but shortly thereafter passed the Declaratory Act--which maintained Parliament’s authority to tax the colonies without their consent. In 1767, Parliament slapped the American colonies with the Townshend Acts. But even after the riots stopped, and new taxes were imposed on the colonies, patriot merchants continued to break the law. To get around the new taxes, merchants and ship owners smuggled in cargo illegally. Provincial government officials were fed up. They could not enforce the taxes, or collect revenue from them, so in 1768, the Board of Commissioners decided to act. They desired to make an example out of Boston’s most notorious smuggler, John Hancock.

In April of 1768, Hancock’s ship, the Lydia arrived in Boston Harbor with a taxable good. Two customs officials, Robert Jackson and Owen Richards, went onboard Hancock’s ship to inspect the cargo, and collect the taxes. As they made their way down into the hold, the Captain of the Lydia, James Scott, ordered the customs officials to leave the ship, and they complied. But at about 8 o’clock in the evening 7

of April 9, Richards returned to the Lydia, and went below into steerage. As Richards was inspecting the cargo, Hancock returned to the ship and ordered Richards to present his orders and commission. Richards did not, so Hancock ordered his crew to eject him from the ship.

The customs officials of Boston were furious over the treatment of their customs agents. If Hancock had not been the target of the Board of Commissioners before the incident onboard the Lydia, now he was. The commissioners wanted to make an example out of a prominent smuggler so they could enforce tax collection, and they had their man. The next opportunity to catch Hancock in the act of smuggling came on May 9, 1768. His sloop, the Liberty had just arrived from Madeira with a cargo hold full of casks of wine. Thomas Kirk, a customs agent, went onboard Hancock’s ship to assess the cargo, and it was reported that the Liberty arrived with only twenty five casks of wine—less than half of the cargo hold’s capacity. The commissioners were suspicious of underreporting, but could do nothing to apprehend Hancock for smuggling goods illegally.

One month later, on June 10, Kirk reported to the commissioners that Captain John Marshall of the Liberty offered him a bribe to underreport the taxable goods in steerage. When Kirk refused, he was nailed into a cabin below deck, and held there for three hours as the hold was emptied. He was released only after with a threat on his life and property should he divulge the events that transpired on Hancock’s ship. Perhaps it was the death of John Marshall on May 10, or the arrival of the British warship, the Romney on May 17 that encouraged Kirk to come forward with evidence against Hancock. In any case, Kirk brought the allegations to Joseph Harrison, the collector of the port, who took the case before the commissioners. On hearing the story, the commissioners ordered the Liberty to be seized as property of the Crown.

The next day, Joseph Harrison and Benjamin Hallowell made their way down to Hancock’s wharf. Harrison boarded the ship and placed the King’s seal on the mainmast. As this was happening, sailors from the Romney tied lines to the sloop and started to haul it away from the wharf. At this time, hundreds of resentful Bostonians swarmed Hancock’s wharf, grabbed onto whatever ropes they could, and tried to secure the Liberty to land. Eventually, the sailors prevailed, and successfully hauled away Hancock’s sloop as property of the British government.

While this was happening Hallowell and Harrison were trapped on Hancock’s ship. Not being avid swimmers, they jumped onto the wharf, and tried to make their escape through the crowd. Some members of the mob, who were not engaged in securing the Liberty, started to pelt Harrison and Hallowell with rocks, brickbats, dirt clumps, and oyster shells. After chasing them away, the mob turned their vitriol on the property of the customs officials. They broke the windows of Hallowell’s home, dragged Harrison’s pleasure boat out of the water, and lit it on fire in Boston Common.

The Liberty Affair was proof that the Crown’s officials could no longer enforce the laws effectively. Royal Governor Francis Bernard used the occasion to lobby for a military presence in the town of Boston. On October 1, 1768, the Governor’s wish was granted. Two thousand British Regulars landed at Long Wharf, marched through the streets of Boston with much ceremony, and camped for the night on Boston Common. 8

From the day the soldiers arrived, there was a tremendous amount of friction between the occupying force, and the inhabitants of the town. For one, the town did not want to shoulder the responsibility of providing barracks for the soldiers, much less feeding them. To make matters worse, the soldier’s meager salary was less than that of a chimney sweep in England. In their free time, soldiers would walk the streets looking for jobs to supplement their substandard pay. In a town that had been experiencing an economic downturn since the end of the French and Indian War, 1768 was the worst time for two thousand poorly paid soldiers to flood the labor market. On Friday, March 2, 1770, Private Walker of the 29th Regiment was looking for work by John Gray’s ropewalk. One of the rope makers, William Green, called out to Walker, “If you’re looking for work, you can clean my chamber pot!” This incensed Walker who promptly fled the scene. Later that day, Walker returned with more than a dozen of his comrades looking for a fight. One of the leaders of the soldiers, an Afro-Caribbean drummer, had a giant cutlass chained to his chest. The soldiers tried to take Gray’s ropewalk, but were fought off by the rope makers.

On Sunday, March 4, the soldiers noticed that Sergeant Chambers, who was involved in the scuffle at Gray’s ropewalk, was still missing. Lieutenant Colonel Maurice Carr assumed that he was being held hostage at the ropewalk, and brought a few officers with him to search for the missing sergeant. When John Gray learned of the intrusion, he went to talk to the commander of the British forces in Boston, Colonel Dalrymple, to work out a compromise. During this meeting, Carr stormed into Dalrymple’s headquarters, and expressed anger over the treatment of the British regulars by the town’s inhabitants. The next morning, the sergeant was found unscathed in a tavern, enjoying his time away from his martial responsibilities. While this allayed Carr’s fears, it was clear to all that the mounting animosities between the town and the Army would have a bloody conclusion.

By Monday, March 5, 1770, there was still no solution on how to handle the dangerous situation in Boston. On that day, Edward Gerrish, a wig maker’s apprentice was following Captain Goldfinch around, hurling accusations that he did not pay for the wig he was wearing. Rather than show his receipt, Goldfinch continued his evening stroll around town, as a crowd of angry Bostonians joined in with Gerrish in taunting the Captain. At this time, Private Hugh White, a sentry at Murray’s barracks, intercepted the wig maker’s apprentice claiming that Goldfinch “is a gentleman, and if he owes you anything, he will pay it.” Gerrish responded that there are no gentlemen in the regiment. Hugh White, raging with furry, struck the apprentice with the bottom of his gun. At this point, other apprentices rushed into the streets to Gerrish’s aid. They taunted White with “lobsterback,” “scoundrel,” “bloody back,” while hurling snowballs and brickbats at him.

Almost simultaneously, another scuffle ensued only a few blocks away at Murray’s barracks. A few teenage apprentices were harassing the soldiers stationed underneath an overpass called Draper’s Alley. The soldiers took great offence to the insults, and they returned with swords and cudgels drawn. At this moment, Captain Goldfinch happened to be walking by with Gerrish close behind. Goldfinch was an officer in the 14th regiment, and the soldiers by Draper’s Alley were from the 29th Regiment, which meant their orders could only come from an officer in their unit. Still, Goldfinch barked out orders to the offending soldiers by Draper’s Alley to return to their barracks. Most of them did with the notable exception of one soldier, who came charging out with musket in hand and yelled to the crowd “G. damn 9

your blood, I’ll make a lane through you all.” The officers in the 14th regiment grabbed the soldier by the coat, shut the gate to Draper’s Alley, and sent the offender back to his barracks.

Moments later, around 9:15 PM, the sound of church bells pealing filled the air. When the bells went off unexpectedly, it was a signal to the town that a fire was town born. In such a situation, all of the males in the town would turn out with fire buckets to tame the conflagration, and many did, only to realize that there was no fire. Within minutes, hundreds of people spilled out into the streets, and joined the apprentices in harassing Private Hugh White on King Street. About thirty of them, led by the tall mulatto Crispus Attucks, surrounded White, hurling snowballs, oyster shells, and brickbats at the sentry. Knowing that a soldier could only fire on a crowd if he was ordered to do so by the Magistrate, the young apprentices taunted him shouting “Fire! Damn you fire!” As the crowd continued to surround White, officers in the nearby Custom House were alerted to the danger. Captain Thomas Preston called out to his men, “Damn you! Turn out guard!” Hearing the cry for help, Corporal William Wemms charged onto King Street with six grenadiers. When they arrived on the scene, Wemms ordered his men to form a half circle around White, and load their muskets. Preston, who trailed behind rushed to King Street to take command of the grenadiers when Henry Knox, a bookseller in Boston grabbed him by the coat and warned, “For God’s sake, take care of your men for if they fire your life must be answerable.”

Preston rushed past Knox and assumed command of his encircled grenadiers. Once there, he tried to calm the angry crowd. He stood in between his men and the soldiers and ordered them not to fire. All the while, snowballs, ice, oysters, and clubs continued to rain down on the soldiers. Richard Palmes, tried to mitigate the tense situation. He approached Captain Preston and placed his hand on his right shoulder. Palmes asked Preston if their muskets were loaded to which Preston replied they were, “with powder and ball.” Palmes next said “I hope you do not intend to fire on the inhabitants [of Boston].” Captain Preston assured Palmes “by no means.”

Moments later, a piece of ice flew through the air, and struck Private Montgomery’s musket. Taken by surprise, and slipping on the ice beneath his feet, Montgomery struggled to regain his balance, and as he did, discharged his musket. In quick succession, the rest of the embattled soldiers fired into the unarmed crowd. When the smoke cleared, three Bostonians were pronounced dead, and two mortally wounded.

The incident on King Street became a rallying point for the Sons of Liberty. Henry Pelham did his best to render the scene in his engraving of the Boston Massacre, but the radicals of the Sons of Liberty went further to keep the event fresh in popular memory. Paul Revere copied Pelham’s engraving, and then took it one step further by adding “The Bloody Massacre Perpetrated in King Street,” to the title, and depicted Captain Preston behind his men, ordering them to fire on the innocent, unsuspecting crowd. He even changed the signs on the buildings around the redcoats. Directly behind the soldiers of the 29th Regiment was a place Revere called “Butcher’s Hall.” This building never existed, but was effective in Revere’s engraving at labeling the British Army as murderers, and butchers. Other leaders of the radical movement such as John Hancock, and Dr. Joseph Warren delivered eulogies on the Boston Massacre every year on March 5 to commemorate the victims, and keep the Glorious Cause alive. It was clear that by firing their muskets into a crowd, a line had been crossed, and the stage was set for a showdown between the occupying British Army, and the inhabitants of Boston. 10

The Boston Massacre

Using the Common Core chart of I See/ it means (see below), have your students analyze this engraving by Henry Pelham of the Boston Massacre. Take notes of the scene, and be ready to compare it to Paul Revere’s rendering of the same scene. Henry Pelham’s “The Fruits of Arbitrary Power, or the Bloody Massacre”

11

Paul Revere’s “The Bloody Massacre Perpetrated in King Street”

12

I See It Means*

 Record as many details as possible that provide For each detail clues to the illustration, cartoon, photo or artifact  Describe the action taking place  Generate inferences or predictions  The details must be observable and can include text Consider the following:  What roles does this detail play?  Why is it important?  What is its purpose?  What does this detail mean or represent?  What is it a symbol of?  Explain how the words in the cartoon clarify the symbols

Summary/Analysis Write a brief response to the questions: What do all the details add up to? What is the meaning of this illustration, photo, or cartoon? Explain the message of the cartoon using key terms and key people.  Background knowledge can be brought in here  Use key terms/key people whenever possible  Analysis  What is the POV of the artist, cartoonist, etc.  What special interest groups would agree/disagree with the cartoon’s message? Why?

Primary Source Material from the Boston Massacre

Document 1: Benjamin Edes’ Account of the Boston Massacre

The Town of Boston Affords a Recent Melancholy Demonstration

By Benjamin Edes, Printer of the Boston Gazette, and Country Journal

The Town of Boston affords a recent, and melancholy demonstration of the destructive consequences of quartering troops among citizens in a time of peace, under a pretense of supporting the laws and aiding civil authority; every considerate and unprejudiced person among us was deeply impressed with the apprehension of these consequences when it was known that a number of regiments were ordered to this town under such a pretext, but in reality, to enforce oppressive measures; to awe and control the legislative 13 as well as executive power of the province, and to quell a spirit of liberty, which however it may have been basely opposed and even ridiculed by some, would do honor to any age or country.

A few persons amongst us have determined to use all their influence to procure so destructive a measure with a view to their securely enjoying the profits of an American revenue, and unhappily both for Britain and this country they found the means to effect it.

It is to [Royal] Governor [Francis] Bernard, the Commissioners, and their confidents and coadjutors, that we are indebted as the procuring cause of a military power in this capital—the Boston Journal of occurrences, as printed in Mr. Holt’s York Gazette, from time to time, afforded many striking instances of the distresses brought upon the inhabitants by this measure; and since those journals have been discontinued, our troubles from that quarter have been growing upon us: We have known a party of soldiers in the face of day fire off loaded musket[s] upon the inhabitants [of Boston], others have been pricked with bayonets, and even our magistrates assaulted and put in danger of their lives, when offenders brought before them have been rescued; and why those and other bold and base criminals have as yet escaped the punishment due to their crimes, may be soon matter of enquiry by the representative Body of this People—it is natural to suppose that when the inhabitants of this town saw those laws which had been enacted for their security, and which they were ambitious of holding up the soldiery, eluded, they should more commonly resent for themselves—and accordingly it has so happened, many have been the squabbles between them and the soldiery; but it seems their being often worsened by our youth in those encounters, has only served to irritate the former.

What happened at Gray’s ropewalk [on March 2] has already been given to the public, and may be said to have led the way to the late catastrophe. The ropewalk lads, when attacked by superior numbers [of British soldiers], should defend themselves with the spirit and success they displayed.

On the evening of Monday [March 5, 1770], several soldiers of the 29th Regiment were seen parading the streets with their drawn cutlasses and bayonets, abusing and wounding numbers of the inhabitants [of Boston].

A few minutes after nine o’clock, four youths, named Edward Archbald, William Merchant, Francis Archbald, and John Leech came down Cornhill together, and separating at Doctor Loring’s corner, Francis Archbald and Leech passed down the narrow alley leading to Murray’s barrack, in which a soldier was brandishing a broad sword of uncommon size against the walls, out of which he struck fire plentifully. A person of mean countenance armed with a large cudgel bore him company. Edward Archbald admonished Mr. Merchant to take care of the sword, on which the soldier turned round and struck Archbald in the arm, then pushed at Merchant and pierced through his clothes on his arm. Merchand then struck the soldier with a short stick he had, and the other person ran to the barrack and brought with him two soldiers, one armed with a pair of tongs.

The noise brought people together, and John Hicks, a young lad, coming up, knocked the soldier down but let him get back up again; and more lads gathering, drove them back to the barrack, where the boys stood some time as it were to keep them in. In less than a minute 10 or 12 of them came out with drawn 14 cutlasses, clubs and bayonets and set upon the unarmed boys and young folks, who stood them a little while, but finding the inequality of their equipment dispersed. On hearing the noise, one Samuel Atwood, came up to see what was the matter, and entering the alley from dock-square, heard the latter part of the combat, and when the boys had dispersed he met the 10 or 12 soldiers rushing down the alley towards the square, and asked them if they intended to murder people. They answered: “Yes!” With that one of them struck Mr. Atwood with a club, which was repeated by another, and being unarmed he turned to go off, and received a wound on the left shoulder which reached the bone an gave him much pain. Retreating a few steps, Mr. Atwood met two officers and said Gentlemen, what is the matter? They answered, you’ll see by and by.

Next, thirty to forty lads gathered on King Street. Captain Thomas Preston, with a party of [soldiers] with [fixed] bayonets came from the main guard of the Commissioner’s house, the soldiers pushing their bayonets crying, “Make way!” They took place by the custom house, continuing to push people off, and even pricked some of them with their bayonets. The people gathered around the soldiers hurled snowballs back at the soldiers. On this, Captain Thomas Preston commanded his men to fire. More snowballs were thrown by the crowd, and Preston again cried out “Fire men! Be the consequence what it will!” One soldier then fired, and a townsman from the crowd struck him over the hands with such a force that he dropped his musket. Still, the soldiers continued to fire, successively, until 7 or 8 guns were discharged.

By this fatal maneuver, three men were laid dead on the spot, and two or more struggling for life; but what showed a degree of cruelty unknown to British troops, at least since the house of Hanover has directed their operations, was an attempt to fire upon or push with their bayonets, the people who were rushing to the scene to remove the slain and wounded.

Review Questions

1. From which perspective was the author, Benjamin Edes, witnessing the Boston Massacre from? Was he sympathetic to the soldiers, or the crowd harassing the soldiers? 2. Does the author take a stance on the redcoat occupation of Boston, if so, who does he side with? Use quotes from the primary source as evidence.

Critical Questions

1. Why would Benjamin Edes print this account of the Boston Massacre in the Boston Gazette? Who was his intended audience? 2. Based on your readings related to the Boston Massacre, do you think Benjamin Edes sensationalized his account of the Boston Massacre? If yes, list some examples.

15

Boston Massacre

Document 2: A Fair Account of the Late Unhappy Disturbance at Boston in New England: Extracted from the Depositions have been Made Concerning it by Persons of Both Parties

By Francis Maseres, Esqre.

Whoever has conversed much with those who have been lately at Boston must know that the arrival of the King’s troops at that town in 1768 was exceedingly disgustful to all that part of the people who call themselves the Sons of Liberty, and deny the authority of British Parliament to pass the late acts for imposing duties upon certain articles of trade imported into America, and who certainly from a great majority of the people in that town, though perhaps not of the persons of the best fortunes and most respectable characters in the place. Whether they are right in this opinion, I shall not here inquire. But it ought to be clear beyond the possibility of a doubt on the side of the Americans, in order to justify the violent measures that have been taken at Boston to carry it into practice, which have amounted to little less than a forcible opposition to the execution of those acts of Parliament, or, in the language of the statute of treason, a levying was against the King [of England].

And in the conduct of this opposition (even if we suppose for a moment that the opposition itself could be justified upon the principles of the law of nature, which in some cases of extreme necessity allows of a resistance against illegal exercises of power), they have not behaved with that openness and candour that would have been suitable to the dignity of their pretensions, but have persecuted both those of their own countrymen who presumed to differ from them in opinion, and the King’s troops who were sent tither to preserve public peace, with the utmost malice and injustice.

And as for the King’s troops, who were sent [here] in October 1768, they have been treated by these Sons of Liberty with a degree of cruelty that could not have been justified, and probably would have been practiced by them, towards prisoners of war of the nation with which we are the oftenest at enmity. For [the Sons of Liberty] not only, upon the first arrival of these troops at Boston, did everything in their power to prevent their having quarters assigned to them to continue in camp, though the rigour of the winter season was beginning to be felt; but they have ever since been traducing them with the most scurrilous and abusive language, and harassing them with vexatious actions at law for trifling trespasses occasioned by provocations designedly given by themselves in order to draw them into difficulties; and with malicious accusations, oftentimes entirely false, and always overcharged; and with every other low and spiteful device that rage and disappointment at the check they received in their designs by the arrival of those regiments at Boston, could suggest.

On Monday, the 5th of March, the day of the disturbance that proved fatal to some of the inhabitants, about seven o’clock in the evening, numbers of the towns-people of Boston were seen walking the streets, in several different parties of from about three to six men each, armed with clubs. Mr. John Gillespie, in his deposition, (No. 104) declares that, as he was going to the south end of the town, to meet some friends at a 16 public house, he met several people in the streets in parties of this kind, to the number, as he thinks, of forty or fifty persons; and that while he was sitting with his friends there, several persons of his acquaintance came in to them at different times, and took notice of the numbers of persons they had seen in the street armed in the above manner; and that about eight o’clock one Mr. Flemming came in and told them that three hundred people were assembled at [the] Liberty Tree armed with sticks and clubs to beat the soldiers. Mr Gillespie goes on and says, that about half an hour after eight the bells rung, which he and his company took to be for fire; but they were told by the landlord that it was to collect the mob. Mr. Gillespie upon this resolved to go home, and in his way met numbers of people who were running past him, of whom many were armed with sticks and clubs, and some with other weapons. At the same time a number of people passed by him with two fire engines, as if there had been a fire in town. But they were soon told that there was no fire, but that the people were going to fight the soldiers; upon which they immediately quitted the fire engines, and swore they would go their assistance. All this happened before the soldiers near the custom house fired their muskets, which was not until half an hour after nine o’clock; and it shows that the inhabits had formed, and were preparing to execute, a design of attacking the soldiers on that evening.

This account is confirmed by the deposition William Davies, sergeant-major to the 14th Regiment, who declares that, on the same evening about eight o’clock, as he was going towards the north end [of Boston] on regimental business, he saw in the streets a large body of the inhabitants, armed with firearms, others with cutlasses and bludgeons, crying out, that “they would do for those rascals, the officers and soldiers, that night.” This was more than an hour before the firing. He says further, that he returned home about nine o’clock, and as he came near the marketplace, he saw a greater number of people than before, tearing up butchers stalls for clubs, and swearing they would murder the first soldier or officer they should meet with. Then they gave three huzzas, and cried, “Now for the bloody-back rascals.” And some of them said, “Let us attack the main guard.” Others proposed to attack Col. Francis Smith’s barracks; and others said, “Away to the rope walk.”

[The apprentices harried a sentry by the name of Hugh White, and cornered him against the custom house door.] The sentry, being thus pressed, knocked at the custom house door very hard for assistance: and in a few minutes, a party of twelve soldiers, headed by Captain Preston, came to him from the main guard, with their arms in a horizontal posture, and their bayonets fixed. They drew up immediately before the door of the custom-house with their faces towards the people, and held their guns breast high, in order to defend [White]; and Captain Preston stood before them near the ends of their guns. Mr. Richard Palmes at this went up to the captain, and asked him if the soldier’s guns were loaded with [gun] powder and [musket] ball. Mr. Palmes then said to him, “I hope you do not intend [the soldiers to] fire upon the inhabitants,” to which [Preston] answered, “by no means.”

But the people continued to insult and defy this party of soldiers in the same manner as they had done the single sentinel, pelting them with sticks and balls of ice, and calling out to them, "Damn you, you rascals; fire. You dare not fire. Fire, and be damned." These expressions were frequently repeated; during which time Captain Preston spoke often to the mob, desiring them to be quiet and disperse; for that, if they 17 continued their attack upon him and his party, he should be obliged to fire upon them. But his humane endeavors were to no purpose.

The people continued their attack upon the soldiers, till they were provoked beyond all patience. A large stick, or, as Mr. Palmes says, a piece of ice, that was thrown at the grenadier on the right of the party, struck him with violence and made him stagger, upon which both he and the soldier next to him fired their pieces without any order from Captain Preston for that purpose, and soon after the rest of the party did the same; by which three men were killed on the spot, and eight wounded, of whom two have since died of their wounds. Presently after the last gun was fired off, Captain Preston sprung before the soldiers, and waving his sword or stick, said, "Damn ye, rascals, what did ye fire for?” and struck up the gun of one of the soldiers who was loading again; whereupon they seemed confounded, and fired no more.

Review Questions

1. From which perspective did the author view the Sons of Liberty from? Provide quotes from the text to support your point. 2. How did the author describe the occupation of Boston by the British Army? Provide examples from the text.

Critical Questions

1. Based on the text, how did the Sons of Liberty treat the occupying force of the British Army? Did their treatment of the British regulars encourage the soldiers to fire their muskets into the crowd? 2. Which primary account of the Boston Massacre do you believe and why? Provide specific examples from each text.

18

Boston Massacre Trial 8

The Boston Massacre on March 5, 1770 produced an outcry from the inhabitants of Boston. Cries for vengeance came from all corners of Boston, and it seemed a foregone conclusion that, at the very least, the soldiers would be convicted of manslaughter. Many lawyers with loyalist sympathies refused to defend the British regulars, but John Adams, who was interested in giving the soldiers a fair trial, reluctantly took the case, and was helped by Josiah Quincy Jr. For the prosecution, the town of Boston hired Massachusetts Solicitor General Samuel Quincy, and private attorney Robert Treat Paine.

Captain Thomas Preston of the 29th Regiment was tried separate from the soldiers in October of 1770. The jury acquitted him of the charge of ordering his men to fire on the unarmed crowd. On November 27, 1770, the trial for the soldiers opened. The prosecution pinned their case on the soldier’s innate hatred of the inhabitants of Boston. The soldiers were characterized as lowlife brawlers, drunks, and agitators. From the perspective of the prosecution, the soldiers were responsible for the fights leading up to the massacre, and thus led the townspeople into a trap.

When Josiah Quincy Jr. stated his case for the defense, he reminded the jury that the soldiers must only be judged by the “evidence here in court produced by them, and by nothing else!” The tact by the defense to judge the Boston Massacre only by lawful evidence gave them an advantage. The prosecutors appeared emotional from the event, and thus the evidence they provided the court was murky at best. Perhaps this explains why the soldiers were vindicated. But the acquittal of the soldiers sent shockwaves throughout the empire, and demonstrated to the Crown’s officials and the town’s inhabitants alike that Massachusetts was a lawful town, and could exercise proper justice when called upon. When the Administration of Justice Act was passed in 1774 as part of the Coercive (Intolerable) Acts, and in response to the Boston Tea Party, the colonies were outraged by the lack of trust with regard to their abilities to follow the law. This, along with the other four Coercive Acts, pushed patriots down the road to revolution.

To this day, nobody can be sure of the events that took place on King Street that fateful night in March of 1770. But with hindsight, we can see how the event, and the memory of the Boston Massacre secured a moral high ground for the patriots, which they continued to exploit in the years leading up to the American Revolution.

Classroom Trial Activity

Split your class into three groups. The first group will be the prosecution, and will argue against the British soldiers who fired into the crowd on King Street, while the second group will play the defense, and plead the case of the British soldiers. The third group will be the jury, and once both sides of the argument are presented, will decide on the case. Below are a few arguments for your class to consider. 19

I. Prosecution (Samuel Quincy and Robert Treat Paine)

i. The British regulars were antagonistic toward the town’s populace since they arrived. ii. The British soldiers started the brawls with the town’s populace on March 2, 1770 at John Gray’s Ropewalk. iii. The officers in the British Army did not do enough to diffuse the tense situation once the brawls started on Friday, March 2, 1770. iv. The soldiers of the 29th regiment that fired into the crowd purposefully aimed at people they had quarrels with in the previous days. v. Captain Preston was standing in back of his men, and ordered his men to fire. vi. The soldiers had loaded their muskets with gun powder and musket balls beforehand, meaning they had the intention to fire all along.

II. Defense (John Adams and Josiah Quincy Jr.) i. The soldiers were under attack by the town’s populace. The crowd was throwing rocks, brickbats, oyster shells, and sticks at the soldiers. ii. By law, the soldiers had the right to defend themselves while under attack. iii. The town’s inhabitants were antagonistic towards the soldiers because they were trying to take jobs in Boston. iv. The soldiers did not intend to fire, it happened by accident when Private Montgomery tripped and dropped his gun. v. Captain Preston was standing in front of his men, meaning that he would not order them to fire if he was in the path of the gunfire.