Crispus Attucks And The Boston Massacre

The Boston Massacre was an incident that took place on March 5, 1770 where the British Army killed five male civilians as well as injuring six others. The use of propaganda at the time led by patriots spurred hostility towards the British authority. The result of the hatred was great tension among the public as well as the death of some of the participants. Following the alarming incidence, Thomas Hutchinson, the acting governor committed himself to undertaking an inquiry, which reformed on the following day and the troops withdrew to Castle Island . The soldiers and the civilians arrested there in were arrested and charged with murder. Consequently, John Adams, a defense lawyer defended them and they were acquitted. Thus, this paper focuses on the investigative role of John Adams and the ethics behind the Boston Massacre.

Lord North-was the British Prime Minister during the conflicted time, when the colonies began to rebel. The colonies disliked him because he was a Tory and did not believe in or support the colonial rebellion. However he had government repeal the Townshend Acts, as they caused rebellion from colonists and had little benefit to England

The Townshend Act was passed on 2nd July 1776. The act involved a series of acts that imposed duties on paper, glass, lead, paints and all tea imported into the colonies. The series of measures were introduced by the Exchequer Charles Townshend into the English Parliament. Although many Americans viewed the extra taxation as slavery and abuse of power, its initiator, Mr. Townshend hoped the act would provide money for imperial expenses in the colonies. The act eventually lead to imports from America being limited. After the many complaints and dissatisfaction from the American, the English Parliament finally amended the act in 1770. All duties were scrapped except the tax on tea. This was the last harassment that

Due to the British tightening their control over the colonies to pay off the huge debt after the French and Indian War, patriots rebelled and started a revolution that would lead to great things. These were colonists who believed that the right to govern themselves belonged to the colonies. Britain had recently gotten into a war in the Americas against France and the Native Americans. Although they won and expanded their American empire, the debt they were in was just about up to their necks. To help solve this problem, they took more control over the colonies. Before the Proclamation of 1763, Britain did not pay much attention to the colonies. However Prime Minister George Grenville needed help to pay off the debt, and the British people were already paying taxes on several of their

The Townshend act was proclaimed in 1767. The colonists viewed it as an abuse of power after the last acts. The act was eventually repealed but left the tax on tea. Some of the imported items that it taxed were: glass, lead, paints, paper and tea.

The townshend act was taxation without representation. The British placed a tax on glass, paint, paper, and tea, all items imported from Britain. Patriots took matter into their own hands and boycotted

After about 4 years the Townshend acts were passed. The Townshend acts were originated by Charles Townshend. They were meant to add even more taxes on all imported goods, which makes everything almost double the original price. Great Britain needed to pass this act because they still had so much of the debt to pay ofF. This was a huge financial burden for the colonists. There were many violent protests.This act eventually led to the Boston tea

A series of laws created by the English Parliament and by Chancellor of the Exchequer Charles Townshend. The Townshend Acts added responsibilities on glass, lead, paints, paper and tea imported to colonies. Townshend imagined the acts would provide more money for expenses in the colonies. But many Colonists viewed the Act as a sign of power. Ending in limits for the imports from Britain. In 1770, Parliament repealed all the Townshend acts except the tax on tea.

Desperately for finding a solution to pay off the debt of the war, the British government signed the Townshend duties of 1767, formulated by Charles Townshend, chancellor of the Exchequer. The Townshend duties were new taxes for the American colonies pay on imported products: glass, paper, lead, and tea. Charles Townshend persuaded the British authorities signed the import items with the intention of not only pay the war’s bills, but also increase the British revenue and take back the Parliament’s authority over the American colonies.

The British soldiers were anything but loved by the American colonists in the 1770s. They maliciously planned an attack on the soldiers because of their hate. Many townspeople gathered together in effort to strike against the British presence. The men were just doing their job trying to keep order in Boston, but the people still taunted them. The soldiers were being tried for murder because they fired at the people, but those charges should not have existed. The crowd initially attacked the soldiers, not the other way around. It was also dark out so the soldiers did not know of the number of colonist attackers. The soldiers heard the word fire coming from the crowd, confusing the voices with Captain Preston’s. The incident referred to as the

The Townshend Acts were meant to replace the Stamp Act, which was repealed in 1766. These new acts greatly angered the Bostonians.

Recently, I have been viewing the HBO mini-series titled John Adams; a take on historian David McCullough 's book of the same title. The series begins with the Boston Massacre and continues through historical events that led to the Revolutionary War and the creation of a new government. It has been exciting to watch for various reasons (I love history, especially revolutionary history). However, what struck me in the series is the events leading up to the Declaration of Independence and the war itself. In other words, the moments that led to a dramatic change in thought and action in the colonies. Many of the founders, according to the movie portrayal and McCullough 's interpretation of history, were reluctant of drastic change. Some, if not a majority, wanted reform rather than revolution. It was the persuasive talents of a handful of individuals, as well as some actions by the British, that tipped the tides. As I ponder this perspective of the start of our nation, I cannot help but ask the questions: What is the best approach to initiate needed change? How am I a change agent? And, I frame these questions within the context of the current educational system.

By 1765, at a Stamp Act Congress, all but four colonies were represented as the “Declaration of Rights and Grievances” was passed. They were determined to let Parliament know that they were equal to British citizens, that there would be no “taxation without representation,” and all efforts to stop tax on colonists would continue (Kennedy, etal 2011.) Although Lord Rockingham, the predecessor of Grenville, sought to repeal of the Stamp Act, this in no way meant Parliament was conceding their control. In fact, while the Stamp Act was repealed, another called the “Declaratory Act of 1766,” gave Parliament the authority to make laws binding the American Colonies, “in all cases whatsoever.” In 1767, George III passed the Townshend Acts to collect tax on glass, lead, paints, paper and, tea. Recognizing that tea was a favorite among the Americans, it ensured greater revenue the British government. Again, the colonists’ rights for representation were ignored and they started to boycott British goods and ultimately, smuggle tea. When the Quartering Act was passed, which specified that colonists were to give room and board to British troops, tension began to rise. For two years, the colonists tolerated British troops on their soil and their dissatisfaction with the British Parliament and King George III became evident through many violent riots, abusiveness of tax collectors and destruction of property. According to Kennedy, etal (2011), Parliament, continually met with

After analyzing the video about the Boston Massacre, what it should be called depends all on which side you took. Patriots would have took this as a massacre because, not only would it blame the British, but their people were also considered "slaughtered". Thus, to the Patriots, this would be considered a massacre. However, for the Loyalists and British, this would be considered a riot. A crowd of colonists threw snowballs, stones, oyster shells, and even wood at British soldiers. This was basically a disturbance of peace, or a riot. The soldiers had the right of defending themselves, so I do understand the reasons for shooting, but killing wasn't necessary. In the end however, in my opinion, without being biased to any sides, the Boston Massacre should be considered a riot.

There were many events that led up to the American Revolution. After the British defeated France and the Treaty of Paris was signed in 1763, Parliament began enforcing colonists to help pay for debts that were accrued during the war. George Grenville, Britain’s chief minister, constructed laws such as the Stamp Act, Sugar Act and Quartering Act. These new policies that set in place tariffs on imports, exports, and regulations on trade, infuriated colonists (Tindall & Shi, pg. 121). Colonist did not want to allow such imposed taxes because the people themselves were not represented as equal British subjects. “The issue of taxation became a question of the colonist’ place in the imperial system” (Calloway, pg. 14). Also, after the British victory in the Seven Year war settlers were eager to expand west. British government wanted the colonist to stay east where trade was a major profit, and to navigate to the north or south. The Royal Proclamation of 1763 establishes the Appalachian Mountains as the boundary line between British and Indian lands. This was in part to keep Indian alliances and to keep control on the settler’s expansion. Henry Ellis, Governor of Georgia, spoke of