Boston Massacre (Research Paper Sample)

BOSTON MASSACRE
Name:
Course:
Professor
Institution:
Date:
Boston Massacre
An interesting turn of events on the evening of the fifth of March 1770 resulted in the inaccurate naming the day as the Boston Massacre. Eye-witness reports popularized by newspaper reports at the time reflected the two differing sides that included the colonists’ and the British opinions on the turn of events. Depending on the angle taken while looking at the issue, there are widely conflicting accounts. This paper examines the two differing views as presented in the Boston Gazette and the London Chronicle at the time while attempting to reconcile these accounts.
The widely accepted argument justifying the occurrence of the riots is based on Boston citizens’ anger over the decision of the colonial government’s decision to raise taxes on the colonies. Beyond the surface, there were growing tensions in Boston as a result of the presence of the British forces in the area. On this particular day, the initial altercation mainly involved insults hurled at a British officer by a young rioter. The officer responded by using his rifle to knock the man on the head. Sometime later, the man returned to the scene escorted by a group effectively creating a scene after the church bells were used to summon Boston residents to the scene. The crowd rapidly grew eventually outnumbering the thirteen British soldiers. The violent crowd began throwing crude items at the soldiers manning the Customs House daring them to retaliate. Eventually, the events that became a significant part of America’s colonial history lasting a mere twenty minutes resulted in the subsequent shooting and death of three people in the crowd. The striking thing about the event is that the colonists immediately branded it as a massacre of insurmountable proportions. Print media that was dominant at the time capitalized on the situation by closely monitoring events that immediately followed. Revere Paul produced a well-known engraving that has formed become the emblem of the entire event. The engraving shows what can be described as a well-planned attack by armed British soldiers on helpless citizens. The image of the colonial government by this representation succeeded in forming the foundation of the nation’s path to freedom some years later.
As an immediate aftermath, Captain Thomas Preston, the commanding officer and eight of the British soldiers involved in the shooting were held as legal proceedings on the case began. On the other hand, the victims of the shooting were used symbolically to represent perceived oppressions of the colonial government. This also marked the beginning of the colonial government’s struggle to maintain order in the area. In a surprising turn of events, six of the British soldiers and their Captain were eventually exonerated. The remaining two officers found guilty of manslaughter were let off with a minor punishment. Indeed, the families of the victims perceived a lack of adequate punishment to the soldiers involved in the shooting. The subsequent removal of the British force in the immediate Boston area succeeded in calming the tempers in Boston. This notwithstanding, the event created an impetus for revolutionary action that was kept alive through annual commemorations of the event. As mentioned earlier, there is a rich collection of articles, speeches from that particular event in the history of America. Examined from the American’s point of view, the events at Boston were a major and shocking representation of the nature of the colonial administration.
A slightly varying view of the events during what is known as the Boston Massacre involves the retelling of events by Captain Thomas Preston during his trial. Preston’s account begins with retelling the assault on two British soldiers. According to Preston, he assumed that subsequent sound of bells was a result of a fire. A short time later an officer reported to him the intentions of the rioting mob to attack the soldiers meaning that the bells were, in fact, a call so that more people could congregate to the scene. On his way, Preston reports witnessing the threats being made on the soldiers on advancing groups of people. Additionally, he determined that the mob intended to loot the Custom House and make off with the resources stored there. The soldier guarding the establishment also reported to Preston the threats made by the group on his life.
Preston’s first course of action was to assign a dozen of his officers with the responsibility of securing the Custom House. Preston soon followed with the view of being on site to help manage issues that could occur in case of violent incitements. They soon hurried through the crowd and managed to keep the mob at bay by charging with their weapons. Preston stated equivocally that he was never planning the demise of any individual and that he had instructed his men not to discharge ammunition at the scene. Indeed, Preston admits that he may have demonstrated delinquent behavior by doing so. However, it confirms that his objective was to act repulsively rather the forcefully. Preston continues to note that the crowd expanded and became more aggressive while still verbally assaulting his men. Preston’s objective throughout the entire ordeal was to calm the crowd while trying to have the people disperse peacefully. These attempts were largely unsuccessful as the crowd progressed to the soldiers while engaging them violently as if daring them to respond. At that point, the crowd even enquired from Preston as to whether he intended to order the soldiers to shoot. Preston responded with a resounding no even placed himself between his men and the crowd.
While he was still addressing the crowd, someone in the crowd used a club to strike one of the British soldiers compelling him to discharge his musket. While attempting to enquire as to why he had fired without orders Preston was also attacked consecutively by the crowd. At that point the violence got completely out of hand as the crowd attacked Preston and his men with an assortment of crude objects. It became clear that lives were in evident danger. It is during this confusion that some of Preston’s men opened fire into the crowd. The crowd then fled, with the exception of three men who in lay dead while three others were injured. Preston makes it clear that the events lasted nearly 20 minutes.
The reason given by the officers for discharging their weapons is that they had apparently heard Preston issue the order to fire. All the while Preston insisted that he had issued no such statement. He reiterated that his words were to not fire or kill. Indeed, it was hardly workable to expect the soldiers to know who had said what considering the extensive chaos of the moment. Later the crowd returned to claim the bodies at which point the soldiers assumed that it was a further attack. Preston made a point of stopping them from shooting further. Immediately after these events, Preston claims to have received warnings on an imminent attempt on the lives of the British regiment. At that point, he passed judgment that it would be perilous to stay there any longer.
The colonial government’s administrative policies were generally viewed as oppressive. In this particular case the institution of the Townshend Act contributed significantly in generating animosity towards the British troops. The frequent altercations between the American colonists and the British troops were seen as a way of expressing discontent with the administration. The exaggerated response to the events of the fifth of March 1770 was a deliberate move to capitalize on the negative publicity the event would create for the colonial administration. It was this reason that the street fight in Boston was immediately labeled as a massacre and the victims held as heroes. The acquittal of the British soldiers involved was also followed up by heightened anger. The move by the British government to relocate its troops from the Boston area signified the success of this strategy. It can be argued that the British response to the vents of the British massacre exposed weaknesses in the colonial power that encouraged the American colonists to consider the possibility of a full revolution.
During the middle decades of the 18th Century, Britain had undertaken an extensive expansion strategy taking substantial areas particularly from the areas of the American continent occupied by the French. However, this became an unmanageable obligation as a result of the administration demands. The American colonists were also exceptionally troubling. In instituting the Townshend Act, the British were trying to ensure that its subjects contributed to the management of their respective regions. The size of the political and physical challenges of leading a massive international operation overburdened the world's most powerful civilization at the time meaning that it was unable to control a loosely organized dissent. Slightly more than a decade later, the British agree to the provisions of the Treaty of Paris effectively recognizing the American independence.
It is possible to discredit the argument that the Boston Massacre may have been motivated by perceived socio-economic differences between the local population and the British officers. There were very few differences between British troops who landed in 1768 and the citizens of the Boston area . The only major and impor...