Boston Massacre Dbq Analysis

The British had undisputed control of the continent and had very strong thriving economies in the colonies. They also had very large war debts as a result of defending the colonies during the war. This led to the British conclusion for colonies to start paying more taxes in order to pay off these war debts and start making a profit for Britain. On the other hand, the colonies wanted things to stay the way they were. They saw the principle of foreign taxation as leading to a time when Britain would tax the colonies dry and make life there miserable. This led to the fight that eventually led to revolution and independence.

When the Founding Fathers resisted these taxes on principle that Parliament did not have the authority to tax the colonists, Britain attacked and minimized colonial self-rule , declared colonists subject to any act of Parliament , reestablished internal taxes , closed colonial ports, dissolved

1763 marked the end of French and Indian war and caused a great celebration and pride in the American colonies. But, in next twelve years, the same pride was altered by at bitter and violent conflict with the mother country. The injustices of the mother country finally led the American colonists to declare independence and wage war against it. American colonies were justified for waging war and breaking away from Britain because they were defending themselves against a series of measures Parliament wished to impose on their communities without their consent.

Huge debts were owed to Great Britain for supplying the colonists with military support and supplies. To pay the dues, there was the establishment of the Stamp Act, the taxation on domestic goods and services. A tax on domestic merchandise brought even more anger to the colonists. The Sugar Act, the Townshed Duties and the Tea Act were also all introduced with the same fundamentals: applying tax on goods whether it be directly or indirectly, domestic or international. “British commercial regulations imposed a paltry economic burden on Americans, who enjoyed a rapid economic growth and a standard of living higher than their European counterparts” (McGaughy). Each act resulted in irritated colonists. Some even retaliated by tarring and feathering certain English tax enforcers living in the colonies.

     There was another by-product of the war for Britain; her national debt more than doubled during the course of the conflict. At a time when Britain was starting to bend beneath the weight of the debt, it was only a matter of time before parliament looked to the colonies to help shoulder some of the price incurred in their defense. The Sugar and Stamp Acts were the first of many measures to tax the colonists. The Townshend Duties and the Tea Act would follow. While these measures outraged the colonists because of their monetary implications, it was the constitutional implications brought on by the Acts that were most offensive to the colonists. Until after the Seven Years War, the colonists had been left to essentially tax themselves. Now the colonists had a rallying cry, as they deplored the idea of no taxation without representation. In 1765 the Stamp Act Congress was held, and in a bid of utter defiance the representatives agreed that the colonial legislative assemblies alone had the right to tax the colonies. Parliament repealed the Stamp Act, but only after agreeing to pass the Declaratory Act, which informed the colonies that Britain did in fact have the right to legislate for the

There were several reasons colonists wanted to break away from the English. A large reason the colonists wanted to break away from English rule was the amount of high taxes that they had to pay for almost everything, because they essentially had to foot the bill for a war. The colonists also had no say on the laws that were passed by a government that was across an ocean, thus the phrase “No Taxation without Representation.” Paying high taxes and having no say in what laws were passed obviously made the colonists angry with the British government, but another factor was the British would not let the colonists trade with anyone else besides them. This means that all trades going in or out could only be done with Britain. Forcing the colonists to pay whatever the British merchants wanted to set their price at because there was no major competition. All of these things as well as not letting the colonists expand past the Mississippi River, would calumniate into a revolution in which the colonists would form their own government and finally fulfill their wish of breaking away from British rule.

The Boston Massacre occurred on March 5, 1770 in Boston, Massachusetts. The Boston Massacre was a small riot between the colonists and British soldiers. Evidence supports that the colonists were to blame for the events that led to the Boston Massacre, which resulted in five colonial deaths.

They thought that there was not good enough reason for the new taxes. England on the other hand stated that they taxed the colonist more because they were nearly bankrupt after the French and Indian War. That felt someone had to help compensate and since the American colonies benefited more. They need to bear most of the cost for England’s’ protection and administration. (Pg.536). Between 1763 and 1774, the government passed a new series of laws; placing the colonies under strict restrictions and making them pay higher taxes.

The act also gave customs agents the authority to search property, including the colonists’ homes. The colonial response to these acts was increasing violence against the customs officials. In 1768, the British government sent troops to America to reinforce the Townshend Acts and protect the customs agents. At one point there were 4,000 British soldiers in a city of only 16,000 people (Phelan, 24). According to Phelan, there were “almost daily confrontations” between soldiers and civilians (38). There was increasing tension between the troops and the American colonists. Some children as well as adults tormented the troops by throwing snowballs and chunks of ice at the soldiers. There was also increasing tension between the colonists who were loyal to the Crown and those who were loyal to the colonies because some store owners broke their agreements about importing and selling British goods. Children threw trash and rocks at those storeowners’ buildings. Several days before the Boston Massacre, one of the loyalist merchants shot and killed a young man who was a part of group vandalizing his business (Phelan, 44-46). The colonists’ tempers flared.

The Quartering Act was proclaimed in 1765. The act allowed the British soldiers to live in colonist’s houses. It also allowed soldiers to eat and drink colonists’ food. The goal of the act was to keep the uprising of rebels at a low by catching them when the troops moved in, or by overhearing conversations.

When Great Britain controlled the colonies, the Colonists could not live the life they wanted to. They had low paying jobs, were not treated well by the king and his soldiers, and on top of that Britain posted extra taxes on goods. The colonists were already poor from low pay jobs, so taxes just added

On March 5, 1770...The Boston Massacre, known as the Incident on King Street by the British, was an incident on March 5, 1770, in which British Army soldiers shot and killed people while under attack by a lot of colonists. There was not a  massacre on March 5, 1770 in Boston because. According to the sources B,C and D say that the colonists had weapons and they were also attacking in the massacre. The evidence that supports my claims is that in documents B,C,D the colonists are clearly seen with weapons according to the documents with the gazette, it said that the colonists had weapons and were involved in the fight. This supports my own opinion because in document b the colonists are seen with some type of sword or golf club. My second reason

Second, the Quartering Act of 1765 was an act which provided places and supplies for troops and soldiers. “The English passed the Quartering Act because it provided protection for the colonists”(Colonial Unrest). It frustrated the colonists because instead of protecting the colony the colonists felt like the troops were controlling them. Also, “It would make the colonies pay for some of the costs of having

The Boston Massacre is one of the most controversial events in American history that occurred in Boston before the American Revolution. Certainly, it has a fundamental role in the development of America as a nation, which led it to have a huge motivation for revolution. A heavy British military presence and having very high taxes in the country were some of the main reasons that made Boston citizens very irritated. Thus, there were already many disagreements and tensions between inhabitants and the British that could have led to the Massacre. In this essay, I will carefully analyze three primary sources, and compare these to the interpretation given by HBO’s John Adams. In my view, these sources can be

“Between the hours of nine and ten o’clock, being in my master’s house, was alarmed by the cry of fire, I ran down as far as the town-house, and then heard that the soldiers and the inhabitants were fighting in the alley… I then left them and went to King street. I then saw a party of soldiers loading their muskets about the Custom house door, after which they all shouldered. I heard some of the inhabitants cry out, “heave no snow balls”, others cried “they dare not fire”. The Boston massacre has been no massacre it was propaganda. The incident that happened March 5th, 1770 in the streets of Boston only killed five people and had six people with non fatal injuries. There were