Boston Massacre Research Paper

The Boston Massacre was a street fight that occurred on March 5, 1770, between a mob of colonist, throwing snowballs, stones and sticks at a squad of British soldiers. This resulted in the death of five colonist. The Boston Massacre was the tipping point to the boiling tension between the British and the colonist. The trial and verdict would set off the inevitable war between Britain and the colonies of that time. By analyzing the defenses, testimonies, historical facts, and common law of that time I agree and believe that the verdict of the Boston Massacre trials was just. I also came to the conclusion that this trial played an important role in the rising of patriotism and independence from British rule. Even Though the Boston Massacre
The first problem that enraged the colonist was the Proclamation of 1763, this proclamation did not allow colonist to move past the Appalachian Mountains. Then the Stamp Act, which taxed most paper goods and materials. The purpose of the Act was to raise money for the colonial military expenses, this included the British soldiers. Lastly, the Townshend Act, this taxed paint, paper, glass, tea and lead. With so many taxes it was only a matter of time before the colonist decided that they would want to strike back. Following up to the day the Massacre occurred, March 5, 1770, the following are the testimony and deposition used in the trail to describe the events that occurred. According to the Boston Massacre Historical Society webpage there were many witnesses to the confrontation between the colonist and British soldiers. James Woodall deposition was the following, “[...] I saw a great many sticks and pieces of sticks and ice thrown at the Soldiers. The soldier who was knocked down took up his gun and fired directly. Soon after the first gun I saw a gentleman behind the soldiers in velvet of blue or black plush trimmed with gold. He put his hand toward their backs. Whether he
64. Rex v. Wemms, pp. 260-270., John Adam use the basic reasoning to give the following argument, “ [...] The witness saw numbers of things thrown, and he saw plainly sticks strike the guns, about a dozen persons with sticks, gave three cheers, and surrounded the party, and struck the guns with their sticks several blows: [...] He swears positively, that he not only saw ice or snow thrown, but saw the guns struck several times; if you believe this witness, of whose credibility you are wholly the judges, as you are of every other; if you do not believe him, there are many others who swear to circumstances in favour of the prisoners; [...] this witness swears positively, there were a dozen of persons with clubs, surrounded the party; twelve sailors with clubs, were by much an overmatch to eight soldiers, chained there by the order and command of their officer, to stand in defense of the Sentry, not only so, but under an oath to stand there, i.e. to obey the lawful command of their officer, as much, Gentlemen of the jury, as you are under oath to determine this cause by law and evidence; clubs they had not, and they could not defend themselves with their bayonets against so many people; it was in the power of the sailors to kill one half or the whole of the party, if they had been so disposed; what had the soldiers to expect, when twelve persons armed with clubs, (sailors too, between whom and soldiers, there is such an