The massacre occurred on the night of Monday, March 7. Consequently, it was not reported in the weekly papers, usually published on Mondays, until a seek later.
The Boston Gazette and Country Journal, March 12, 1770
The Boston Massacre: The Story Behind The Night
Here is the complete text of the account of the Boston Massacre as reported in the Boston Gazette and Country Journal on Monday, March 12, 1770.
A few minutes after nine o'clock four youths, named Edward Archbald, William Merchant, Francis Archbald, and John Leech, jun., came down Cornhill together, and separating at Doctor Loring's corner, the two former were passing the narrow alley leading Mr. Murray's barrack in which was a soldier brandishing a broad sword of an uncommon size against the walls, out of which he struck fire plentifully.
A person of mean countenance. armed with a large cudgel bore him company. Edward Archbald admonished Mr. Merchant to take care of the sword, on which the soldier turned round and struck Archbald on the arm, then pushed at Merchant and pierced through his clothes inside the arm close to the armpit and grazed the skin. Merchant then struck the soldier with a short stick he had; and the other person ran to the barrack and brought with him two soldiers, one armed with a pair of tongs, the other with a shovel. He with the tongs pursued Archbald back through the alley, collared and laid him over the head with the tongs. The noise brought people together; and John Hicks, a young lad, coming up, knocked the soldier down but let him get up again; and more lads gathering, drove them back to the barrack where the boys stood some time as it were to keep them in. In less than a minute ten or twelve of them came out with drawn cutlasses, clubs, and bayonets and set upon the unarmed boys and young folk who stood them a little while but, finding the inequality of their equipment, dispersed.
On hearing the noise, one Samuel Atwood came up to see what was the matter; and entering the alley from dock square, heard the latter part of the combat; and when the boys had dispersed he met the ten or twelve soldiers aforesaid rushing down the alley towards the square and asked them if they intended to murder people? They answered Yes, by G-d, root and branch! With that one of them struck Mr. Atwood with a club which was repeated by another; and being unarmed, he turned to go off and received a wound on the left shoulder which reached the bone and gave him much pain.
Retreating a few steps, Mr. Atwood met two officers and said, gentlemen, what is the matter They answered, you'll see by and by. Immediately after, those heroes appeared in the square, asking where were the boogers? where were the cowards? But notwithstanding their fierceness to naked men, one of them advanced towards a youth who had a split of a raw stave in his hand and said, damn them, here is one of them. But the young man seeing a person near him with a drawn sword and good cane ready to support him, held up his stave in defiance; and they quietly passed by him up the little alley by Mr. Silsby's to King Street where they attacked single and unarmed persons till they raised much clamour, and then turned down Cornhill Street, insulting all they met in like manner and pursuing some to their very doors.
Thirty or forty persons, mostly lads, being by this means gathered in King Street, Capt. Preston with a party of men with charged bayonets, came from the main guard to the commissioner's house, the soldiers pushing their bayonets, crying, make way! They took place by the custom house and, continuing to push to drive the people off pricked some in several places, on which they were clamorous and, it is said, threw snow balls. On this, the Captain commanded them to fire; and more snow balls coming, he again said, damn you, fire, be the consequence what it will! One soldier then fired, and a townsman with a cudgel struck him over the hands with such force that he dropped his firelock; and, rushing forward, aimed a blow at the Captain's head which grazed his hat and fell pretty heavy upon his arm. However, the soldiers continued the fire successively till seven or eight or, as some say, eleven guns were discharged.
By this fatal manoeuvre three men were laid dead on the spot and two more struggling for life; but what showed a degree of cruelty unknown to British troops, at least since the house of Hanover has directed their operation, was an attempt to fire upon or push with their bayonets the persons who undertook to remove the slain and wounded!
Mr. Benjamin Leigh, now undertaker in the Delph manufactory, came up and after some conversation with Capt. Preston relative to his conduct in this affair, advised him to draw off his men, with which he complied. The dead are Mr. Samuel Gray, killed on the spot, the ball entering his head and beating off a large portion of his skull.
A mulatto man named Crispus Attucks, who was born in Framingham, but lately belonged to New-Providence and was here in order to go for North Carolina, also killed instantly, two balls entering his breast, one of them in special goring the right lobe of the lungs and a great part of the liver most horribly.
Mr. James Caldwell, mate of Capt. Morton's vessel, in like manner killed by two balls entering his back.
Mr. Samuel Maverick, a promising youth of seventeen years of age, son of the widow Maverick, and an apprentice to Mr. Greenwood, ivory-turner, mortally wounded; a ball went through his belly and was cut out at his back. He died the next morning.
A lad named Christopher Monk, about seventeen years of age, an apprentice to Mr. Walker, shipwright, wounded; a ball entered his back about four inches above the left kidney near the spine and was cut out of the breast on the same side. Apprehended he will die.
A lad named John Clark, about seventeen years of age, whose parents live at Medford, and an apprentice to Capt. Samuel Howard of this town, wounded; a ball entered just above his groin and came out at his hip on the opposite side. Apprehended he will die.
Mr. Edward Payne of this town, merchant, standing at his entry door received a ball in his arm which shattered some of the bones.
Mr. John Green, tailor, coming up Leverett's Lane, received a ball just under his hip and lodged in the under part of his thigh, which was extracted.
Mr. Robert Patterson, a seafaring man, who was the person that had his trousers shot through in Richardson's affair, wounded; a ball went through his right arm, and he suffered a great loss of blood.
Mr. Patrick Carr, about thirty years of age, who worked with Mr. Field, leather breeches-maker in Queen Street, wounded; a ball entered near his hip and went out at his side.
A lad named David Parker, an apprentice to Mr. Eddy, the wheelwright, wounded; a ball entered his thigh.
Source: The Boston Gazette and Country Journal, March 12, 1770
---------------------------------Aftermath and Trial:
Trials
The government was determined to give the soldiers a fair trial so there could be no grounds for retaliation from the British and so moderates would not be alienated from the Patriot cause. After several lawyers with Loyalist leanings refused to defend him, Preston sent a request to John Adams, pleading for him to work on the case. Adams, who was already a leading Patriot and who was contemplating a run for public office, agreed to help, in the interest of ensuring a fair trial.[58] Adams was joined by Josiah Quincy II after the latter was assured that the Sons of Liberty would not oppose his appointment, and by Robert Auchmuty, a Loyalist.[59] They were assisted by Sampson Salter Blowers, whose chief duty was to investigate the jury pool, and Paul Revere, who drew a detailed map of the bodies to be used in the trial of the British soldiers held responsible.[60][61] Massachusetts Solicitor General Samuel Quincy and private attorney Robert Treat Paine, hired by the town of Boston, handled the prosecution.[62] Preston was tried separately in late October 1770. He was acquitted after the jury was convinced that he had not ordered the troops to fire.[63]
The trial of the eight soldiers opened on November 27, 1770.[64] Adams told the jury to look beyond the fact the soldiers were British. He argued that if the soldiers were endangered by the mob, which he called "a motley rabble of saucy boys, negroes, and molattoes, Irish teagues and outlandish jack tarrs [i.e. sailors]",[65] they had the legal right to fight back, and so were innocent. If they were provoked but not endangered, he argued, they were at most guilty of manslaughter.[66]
The jury agreed with Adams and acquitted six of the soldiers after two and one-half hours' deliberation. Two of the soldiers were found guilty of manslaughter because there was overwhelming evidence that they had fired directly into the crowd. The jury's decisions suggest that they believed the soldiers had felt threatened by the crowd, but should have delayed firing.[67] The convicted soldiers were granted reduced sentences by pleading benefit of clergy, which reduced their punishment from a death sentence to branding of the thumb in open court.[68]
Carr's deathbed account of the event is regarded as the most important piece of evidence exonerating the eight defendants of murder charges. Carr testified that the soldiers were provoked by the crowd and that the soldiers were much more restrained against the colonists compared to their usual tactics against the people of his native country of Ireland. He claimed that the Boston mob began to throw dangerous projectiles, and that the soldiers fired their muskets in self-defense. The testimony of Samuel Hemmingway is reprinted below:
Q: Were you Patrick Carr's surgeon?
Samuel Hemmingway: I was...
Q: Was he [Carr] apprehensive of his danger?
SH: He told me… he was a native of Ireland, that he had frequently seen mobs, and soldiers called upon to quell them… he had seen soldiers often fire on the people in Ireland, but had never seen them bear half so much before they fired in his life...
Q: When had you the last conversation with him?
SH: About four o'clock in the afternoon, preceding the night on which he died, and he then particularly said, he forgave the man whoever he was that shot him, he was satisfied he had no malice, but fired to defend himself.
When Justices Edmund Trowbridge and Peter Oliver instructed the jury, Oliver specifically addressed Carr's testimony, stating: "this Carr was not upon oath, it is true, but you will determine whether a man just stepping into eternity is not to be believed, especially in favor of a set of men by whom he had lost his life". Carr's testimony is one of the earliest recorded uses of the dying declaration exception to the inadmissibility of hearsay evidence in United States legal code.
Carr's deathbed testimony was used by defense attorney, and future U.S. President, John Adams to exonerate six of the eight defendants on all charges. The other two defendants had their conviction charges reduced from murder to manslaughter, avoiding capital punishment. Adams was further able to circumvent mandated imprisonment for manslaughter through benefit of clergy laws. The two soldiers were subsequently branded on their right thumbs.
When Carr's evidence was determined admissible by the court, Samuel Adams was purported to be outraged. Adams proclaimed that Carr's testimony could not be trusted, since Carr had been Roman Catholic.
The four civilians were tried on December 13. The principal prosecution witness, a servant of one of the accused, made claims that were easily rebutted by defense witnesses. In the face of this weak testimony, as well as waning public interest, the prosecution allegedly failed to press its case very hard. The civilians were all acquitted, and the servant was eventually convicted of perjury, whipped, and banished from the province.
PROPAGANDA
Propaganda battle
In the days and weeks following the incident, a propaganda battle was waged between Boston's radicals and supporters of the government. Both sides published pamphlets that told strikingly different stories, which were principally published in London in a bid to influence opinion there. The Boston Gazette's version of events, for example, characterized the massacre as part of an ongoing scheme to "quell a Spirit of Liberty", and harped on the negative consequences of quartering troops in the city.
A young Boston artist, Henry Pelham, half-brother of the celebrated portrait painter John Singleton Copley, depicted the event. Silversmith and engraver Paul Revere closely copied Pelham's image, and is often credited as its originator. In order to further public outrage, the engraving contained several inflammatory details. Captain Preston is shown ordering his men to fire, and a musket is seen shooting out of the window of the customs office, which is labeled "Butcher's Hall."[48] Artist Christian Remick hand-colored some prints.[1] Some copies of the print show a man with two chest wounds and a somewhat darker face, matching descriptions of Attucks; others show no victim as a person of color. The image was published in the Boston Gazette, circulating widely, and became an effective piece of anti-British propaganda. The image of bright red "lobster backs" and wounded men with red blood was hung in farmhouses across New England.[49]
Anonymous pamphlets were published describing the event from significantly different perspectives. A Short Narrative of the Horrid Massacre, published under the auspices of the Boston town meeting, was principally written by James Bowdoin, a member of the governor's council and a vocal opponent of British colonial policy, along with Samuel Pemberton, and Joseph Warren.[50] It described the shooting and other lesser incidents that took place in the days before as unprovoked attacks on peaceful, law-abiding inhabitants, and was, according to historian Neal Langley York, probably the most influential description of the event.[51] The account it provided was drawn from more than 90 depositions taken after the event, and it included accusations that the soldiers sent by Captain Preston had been deployed with the intention of causing harm.[52] In the interest of minimizing impact on the jury pool, city leaders held back local distribution of the pamphlet, but sent copies to other colonies and to London, where they knew depositions collected by Governor Hutchinson were en route.[53] A second pamphlet, Additional Observations on the Short Narrative, furthered the attack on crown officials by complaining that customs officials (one of whom had left Boston to carry Hutchinson's gathered depositions to London) were abandoning their posts under the pretense that it was too dangerous for them to do their duties.[54]
The depositions that Hutchinson collected and sent to London were eventually published in a pamphlet entitled A Fair Account of the Late Unhappy Disturbance in Boston.[55] Drawn mainly from depositions by soldiers, its account of affairs sought to blame selfish Bostonians for denying the validity of Parliamentary laws. It also blamed the city's hoodlums and gangs for the lawlessness preceding the event, and claimed that they set up an ambush of the soldiers.[56] However, as it was not published until well after the first pamphlet had arrived in London, it ended up having a much smaller impact on the public debate there.
A young Boston artist, Henry Pelham, half-brother of the celebrated portrait painter John Singleton Copley, depicted the event. Silversmith and engraver Paul Revere closely copied Pelham's image, and is often credited as its originator. In order to further public outrage, the engraving contained several inflammatory details. Captain Preston is shown ordering his men to fire, and a musket is seen shooting out of the window of the customs office, which is labeled "Butcher's Hall."[48] Artist Christian Remick hand-colored some prints.[1] Some copies of the print show a man with two chest wounds and a somewhat darker face, matching descriptions of Attucks; others show no victim as a person of color. The image was published in the Boston Gazette, circulating widely, and became an effective piece of anti-British propaganda. The image of bright red "lobster backs" and wounded men with red blood was hung in farmhouses across New England.[49]
Anonymous pamphlets were published describing the event from significantly different perspectives. A Short Narrative of the Horrid Massacre, published under the auspices of the Boston town meeting, was principally written by James Bowdoin, a member of the governor's council and a vocal opponent of British colonial policy, along with Samuel Pemberton, and Joseph Warren.[50] It described the shooting and other lesser incidents that took place in the days before as unprovoked attacks on peaceful, law-abiding inhabitants, and was, according to historian Neal Langley York, probably the most influential description of the event.[51] The account it provided was drawn from more than 90 depositions taken after the event, and it included accusations that the soldiers sent by Captain Preston had been deployed with the intention of causing harm.[52] In the interest of minimizing impact on the jury pool, city leaders held back local distribution of the pamphlet, but sent copies to other colonies and to London, where they knew depositions collected by Governor Hutchinson were en route.[53] A second pamphlet, Additional Observations on the Short Narrative, furthered the attack on crown officials by complaining that customs officials (one of whom had left Boston to carry Hutchinson's gathered depositions to London) were abandoning their posts under the pretense that it was too dangerous for them to do their duties.[54]
The depositions that Hutchinson collected and sent to London were eventually published in a pamphlet entitled A Fair Account of the Late Unhappy Disturbance in Boston.[55] Drawn mainly from depositions by soldiers, its account of affairs sought to blame selfish Bostonians for denying the validity of Parliamentary laws. It also blamed the city's hoodlums and gangs for the lawlessness preceding the event, and claimed that they set up an ambush of the soldiers.[56] However, as it was not published until well after the first pamphlet had arrived in London, it ended up having a much smaller impact on the public debate there.
No comments:
Post a Comment