Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
¶ … Boston Massacre
The initial cause of the Boston Massacre is a mystery because the testimonies of the witnesses conflict with each other in several areas. The testimonies presented do not seem to support the fact that Thomas Preston was guilty as charged. If anything, these testimonies serve to prove that there is more to eyewitness accounts than meets the eye.
Captain Preston's deposition leads us to believe that the mob was definitely aggressive toward the soldiers. They were, in his opinion, encouraging the soldiers to fire. Preston claims he was in between the mob and the soldiers urging them to resolve the matter peacefully, "but to no purpose" (81). The mob was closing in on the soldiers, striking them and their weapons. At this point, he claims that someone asked him in the mob if he intended to order the soldiers to fire. His reply is a staunch no, and he points out that he could very well become a victim of such action. He also points out that that ordering them to fire would prove him not to be an officer because the soldiers were "upon the half cock" (81). His deposition then states that an officer, who had just been struck with a stick, "instantly fired" (81). In retaliation, the mob attacked the soldiers with clubs and snowballs. The captain stresses that he felt their lives were in "imminent danger" (81). The crowd again urged the soldiers to fire, upon which three or four of them did. He claims that the soldiers told him that they heard the word fire and assumed that he said it. His story is that he was saying "Don't fire" and "Stop firing" (81). Since the captain does not mention a time, we can only gauge by other testimony...
His testimony completely contradicts Preston's deposition in that someone ordered the soldiers, "Fire upon 'em damn em" (82). He heard the word fire and in fifteen seconds, he (presumably Montgomery) fired. "I am pretty positive the Capt. bid 'em Prime and load" (82). What is significant about his testimony is that he is "pretty sure" about what he heard as opposed to being completely sure about what he heard. He was not especially close to the captain, so his perspective could be skewed. Peter Cunningham also heard the command to "prime and load" (83). He says that Preston ordered this; however, he also admits that Preston's back was to him when he heard these words. Cunningham was relatively close to the captain, so what he heard might be correct. However, his testimony should be viewed with caution in that he could not see Preston's face to be absolutely sure that it was indeed Preston who ordered the command.
William Wyatt's testimony seems critical because he claims he heard the captain order the soldiers to stop firing. He also heard the crowd urging the soldiers to fire. Additionally, he hears an officer, not Captain Preston, say fire. In fact, he says the soldiers "took no notice" of this statement (83). The same officer repeats fire twice more, and on the third repeat, Wyatt heard shots. He then says that the captain "damn'd them for firing and reprimanded them" (83). His testimony is critical because it supports Preston's deposition. However, his testimony loses some of its credibility because he was so far away from the actual scene.
Benjamin Burdick's testimony seems…
Works Cited
Boston Massacre Brutal Murder or Self-Defense? Boston Massacre is known as the cornerstone of Revolutionary war which resulted into a series of events causing changes in the world's map. On face value, it can be perceived as an incident in which the innocent citizens were murdered by the tyrant government but a careful analysis would reveal that basic reasons of the Boston Massacre are rooted in the years of tension and strain
" (Ready, 2009) This account is a summary of rather detailed events that occurred on the night of March 5, 1770 that resulted in what many claim to have been an event destined to happen as the British overriding authority in the colony presented a threat to the autonomy in the daily operations of the colonists. The purpose for the pilgrimage from the British ruled Empire to the New World
The Boston Massacre: A Rousing Event The Boston Massacre refers to an altercation that occurred when America was a new land, and still technically a colony of the British Empire. The facts of the Boston Massacre are as follows: the parties involved were a group of British soldiers and a group of colonists or patriots. Some historians refer to this event as a “street fight” and others view it as more
The Trial of Captain PrestonIntroductionThe Trial of Captain Preston was a famous trial that took place in Boston, Massachusetts in 1770, following the Boston Massacre. Captain Thomas Preston was a British officer who was accused of ordering his men to fire on a crowd of American colonists, killing five people. The trial was a highly charged political event, with tensions running high between the colonists and the British authorities. John
This bias permeates throughout social circles and businesses seeking qualified job applicants. Yet, Boston's strong economy accommodates growth for anyone who is motivated to succeed. Culturally, Boston is no New York. but, for a city of 600,000, great cultural activities are available without the burden of dealing with an overwhelmingly large city. The city's numerous theaters include the Cutler Majestic Theatre, Boston Opera House, the Wang Center for the Performing Arts,
Boston Marathon Bombing / Sacco Vanzetti There are several poignant similarities existent between the trial of Saaco & Vanzetti, which took place in the early part of the 20th century, and in the bombing of the Boston Marathon and its aftermath, which took place in the early part of the 21st century. Both events involved immigrants. During the epoch in which both events occurred, there was a social climate in the