• John Adams' Defense: John Adams defended British soldiers in the Boston Massacre trial, arguing they acted in self-defense, leading to the acquittal of six soldiers and demonstrating the impact of revolutionary sentiments on the trial.

• Revolutionary Sentiments: Nationalism, patriotism, and economic freedom sentiments influenced the trial, with rhetoric often not matching the facts, highlighting political and economic fissures between the colonists and the British Crown.

• Differing Accounts of the Incident: The accounts of John Hodgson and Paul Revere differ, with Hodgson providing a factual account and Revere offering a partisan perspective, both reflecting the political context of the time.

• John Adams' Reflections: In a letter to William Tudor, John Adams reflected on his defense of the soldiers, considering it a significant and disinterested action in his life, despite his sympathy for the colonists' cause.

• Eyewitness Testimonies: Eyewitness testimonies, like those of Andrew and Rachel Elliott, supported the defense's argument of self-defense, illustrating the conflicting narratives surrounding the incident.

• Impact of Primary Sources: Primary sources, including trial transcripts and newspaper articles, highlight the politicized nature of the trial and the influence of political biases on public opinion, contributing to the growing revolutionary sentiment.

Introduction

Lead defense attorney John Adams, in the trial of British soldiers for the Boston Massacre, expertly argued that the soldiers acted in self-defense.  During the trial, six of the eight soldiers charged with murder were acquitted, demonstrating the forcefulness of Adams’ defense and the revolutionary sentiments surrounding events of that day in early American history.  This essay will leverage primary source documents and the words of contemporaries as witnesses and participants in the Boston Massacre to demonstrate how revolutionary sentiments affected the trial and its outcomes. Where the facts of the event do not match with the rhetoric, political and economic fissures between the King of England and the American colonists emerged, indicating the use of the Boston Massacre as a political rallying-cry for overtaxed and disaffected anti-British rebels. Specifically, the paper will leverage the court transcripts and other primary source documents from John Adams and others to describe revolutionary sentiments that politicized the trial and that were reinforced in the outcomes of the trial including increasing revolutionary zeal and anti-British sentiment.

The Boston Massacre was a pivotal event in the lead-up to the American Revolution, with the deaths of five colonists at the hands of British soldiers inciting widespread outrage and fueling revolutionary sentiment. The trial of the soldiers involved, in which defense attorney John Adams expertly argued for their self-defense, further galvanized these sentiments, ultimately resulting in the acquittal of six of the eight soldiers charged with murder.

Background

In 1770, Boston, Massachusetts Bay Company was a powder keg. Some 2,000 British soldiers roamed among almost 20,000 colonial Americans, enforcing tax laws such as The Stamp Act and the Townshend Acts, billeting in the boroughs and downtown, and generally acting as overwatch men for the bustling citizenry of the Crown.  Previous skirmishes between Boston locals and the British military had been intense and increasingly frequent, but on the bitter cold evening of March 5 a riot broke out at the King’s bank, and in the end three colonists were dead. Several others were wounded, and the soldiers were arrested, going to trial seven months later.  Ironically, colonist and future President of the United States John Adams defended the eight soldiers and the officer in charge, Captain Thomas Preston.  Preston and seven other men were acquitted, and the last two soldiers Hugh Montgomery and Matthew Kilroy were convicted of manslaughter.  Rebels would go on five years later to foment The Boston Tea Party, a precursor to The Revolutionary War and the founding of the United States of America. 

The sentiments of nationalism, a patriotism which were sympathetic to the colonies, and an emerging economic freedom embodied in the phrase ‘no taxation without representation’ animated the trial for the British soldiers involved in the Boston Massacre.  The rhetoric and action around the Boston Massacre did not match the truth surrounding events of that day, demonstrating how a multi-valent modern historiography exposes the lived stories of people impacted, and lifts these stories and voices up, contributing to the narratives of tomorrow.

Body

The trial of the soldiers for murder, or “The Soldiers Trial” was transcribed by John Hodgson and was a major event in pre-revolutionary American law.  It reverberated among the masses and further animated colonists in opposition to British rule.  The trial was the first for American courts in which a British soldier was tried, established American legal precedent that soldiers were subject to American courts, and outlawed murder which then came under legal review. Defense counsel for the soldiers, John Adams noted that "the law, in all vicissitudes of government, fluctuations of the passions, or flights of enthusiasm, will preserve a steady undeviating course; it will not bend to the uncertain wishes, imaginations, and wanton tempers of men. Courts of justice are bound by oath to decide according to the law of the land, and the law of the land is fixed and immutable." Contrary to the accusation of murder by the public, six of the defendants in the trial were acquitted, and two convicted of manslaughter, indicating that the preponderance of evidence supported the soldier’s claims of self-defense.  But the public was incensed, as evidenced in published narratives by revolutionaries like Paul Revere.

"The Short Narrative of the Horrid Massacre" by Paul Revere, which was published in 1770 is illustrative of the political fervor of the late 18th century that would ultimately result in the American Revolution and reflects revolutionaries’ perspective of common people’s attitudes on the Boston Massacre in particular. Revere describes the events leading up to the Boston Massacre and accuses the British soldiers of intentionally firing on the unarmed colonists. This is reflected in the colonists' outrage over the incident. 

However, Revere leans heavily into a propagandistic and political communication style to fan the flames of anti-British sentiment and the greater cause of Revolution.  "The soldiers repeatedly pressed on upon the people with charged bayonets, 'till they pricked some of them.' On which they began to knock away their guns and pelt them with snowballs, pieces of ice, &c., and the soldiers in return, waded through the snow and ice, and pushed their bayonets at them; on which some of the people put themselves in a posture of defense, by gathering in a circle and pushing with their sticks at the points of their bayonets," wrote Revere. This quote demonstrates a broader theme of this analysis by highlighting the grievances colonialists held and the narratives exposed when citizens felt under duress.  Some discussion of this duress captures the essence of political resistance throughout American history, standing in for a rugged individualism brought about by distrust of the State and a pursuit of happiness through personal liberty.

The accounts of the Boston Massacre by John Hodgson and Paul Revere differ in their emphasis and perspective. "The Soldiers Trial" is a factual and impartial account of the trial of the soldiers involved in the incident. Hodgson provides detailed descriptions of the events leading up to the shooting and the subsequent trial, presenting both the prosecution and defense arguments. In contrast, Paul Revere's "The Short Narrative of the Horrid Massacre" is a highly emotional and partisan account of the incident. Revere portrays the British soldiers as brutal aggressors and the colonists as innocent victims, emphasizing the role of the incident in galvanizing support for the American Revolution. Revere's narrative also includes vivid descriptions of the violence and its aftermath, making it a powerful propaganda tool for the revolutionary cause. Despite their differences, both accounts offer valuable insights into the politics and historical context of the Boston Massacre.

"Letter from John Adams to William Tudor" written on August 25, 1815, is a window into John Adams’ thoughts on the trial some decades later.  British soldiers asked him to defend them in court, even though he sympathized with the colonists' cause.  "The Part I took in Defence of Captn. Preston and the Soldiers, procured me Anxiety, and Obloquy enough. It was, however, one of the most gallant, generous, manly and disinterested Actions of my whole Life, and one of the best Pieces of Service I ever rendered my Country," notes Adams.  The fidelity to law and order was paramount in Adams, reflecting his status as a Founder in popular culture as well as political history today.  As the years progressed after the Boston Massacre, the event took on representation broadly described as anti-British rhetoric and pro-revolutionary sentiment in such oration as "An Oration, Delivered March Fifth, 1773," written by Dr. Benjamin Church.

Church speaks out against British oppression and the use of military force against the colonists. He also praises the colonists who died in the Boston Massacre as martyrs of the American cause. His writing reflects the growing anti-British sentiment in the colonies and the increasing demand for independence.  Casting the soldiers as oppressive, lazy, and resentful, he declares that "An insult was given to a small party of soldiers, who were employed, not to preserve the peace of the town, but to overawe the inhabitants; and, not satisfied with the affront offered them, they resented it with the loss of their lives." In this quote, Church criticizes the soldiers' actions and suggests that they were not truly working to preserve the peace of the town but rather to intimidate its inhabitants. He also argues that the use of force in response to a mere insult was unwarranted and resulted in needless bloodshed. 

"Deposition of Andrew and Rachel Elliott" given on March 17, 1770.  Andrew’s and Rachel’s testimony supports the defense's argument that the British soldiers were provoked by the colonists and acted in self-defense and provides a firsthand account of the Boston Massacre from the perspective of witnesses who were sympathetic to the British soldiers. It also illustrates the conflicting narratives and perspectives surrounding the incident and the trial.  "Immediately upon the first discharge of the guns, we both retreated back into the entry of our house, which was very near the place where the unhappy affair happened, and we could then plainly see the soldiers fire again upon the people, who were then running away, and not upon any who were coming towards them; and there was none near them, excepting the deponent Rachel Elliott, who was not nearer to them than the other people who were running away. She being stopped by a gentleman, who requested her to come into his house, which was next to Mr. Child's, and by that means was not many steps from the soldiers." 

"A Fair Account of the Late Unhappy Disturbance in Boston" published in 1770 by John Hancock and Samuel Adams.  The broadside, a single sheet of paper printed on one side only that contained news, literature and posted in public places such as taverns describes the events leading up to the Boston Massacre and accuses the British soldiers of unprovoked aggression. The account also reflects the colonists' view of the incident and their growing resentment toward British authority, highlighting the use of propaganda and political rhetoric.  "Their being soldiers, does not deprive them of the benefit of the laws of their country, and in this case they ought to be tried, not by the rules of martial law, but by the common law of the land, and it must be proved against them that they were guilty of murder, manslaughter, or some other unlawful act." Warren’s "An Oration Delivered at Watertown, March 5, 1776" denounces British tyranny and argues for American independence, adding heft to the ideations of law and order that define the United States today. A significant document, it reflects the growing revolutionary sentiment in the colonies and the increasing call for a break with British rule.  Obliquely referring to the Massacre, Warren said that "if it shall appear that any soldiers have wantonly or cruelly injured any inhabitants of this province, they ought to be tried and punished according to law; but, on the other hand, if any of them are charged falsely, or are prosecuted with a malicious design, they have a right to a fair and impartial trial, and the laws of England are open to protect them." The legal treatment of British soldiers was reflected in the cause of independence and  suggests a belief in the importance of due process and the rule of law, even during the tensions and violence surrounding the Boston Massacre. "The Boston Massacre: A Family History" is a book written by Serena Zabin and explores the event as a deeply personal tragedy that affected many people’s lives. Exploring these lives, she describes the cultural situation in Boston at the time and how the Massacre impacted the lives of people there.

"Boston's Massacre" is a book written by Eric Hinderaker. Hinderaker examines the events and aftermath of the Boston Massacre. Hinderaker also explores the political and social tensions that led to the incident, as well as the legal and political repercussions that followed.  The book illuminates on the complex political and social dynamics of the time and provides a deeper understanding of the events that led to the American Revolution. "Beneath the surface, however, the trial revealed a legal system struggling to accommodate the political pressures of an intensifying revolutionary movement. The political circumstances of the Boston Massacre trial made it impossible for the law to function as it should have, without fear or favor, as a neutral arbiter of justice." Hinderaker's book argues that the Boston Massacre was not a premeditated act of violence by the British soldiers, but rather a tragic accident that resulted from a breakdown in communication and a series of misunderstandings. Importantly, he emphasizes the role that propaganda played in shaping the public's perception of the event, as colonial leaders seized on the tragedy to rally support for their cause of independence.

Newspaper articles from the time also provide valuable primary sources for understanding the politics of the Boston Massacre. Many newspapers were openly partisan, with some advocating for independence and others supporting British rule. The reporting of the massacre was often colored by these political biases, with some newspapers emphasizing the brutality of the British soldiers and others portraying the colonists as unruly and violent.  A a newspaper article from the Boston Gazette, dated March 12, 1770, about the Boston Massacre, notes that "last Monday night a party of soldiers was detached from the main guard, posted at the Custom House, for the protection of a sentry… The sentry, it seems, had been threatened with violence… This treatment was continued till the sentry was forced to call for the assistance of his comrades; upon which a party was immediately dispatched to his relief."

Newspaper articles also played an important role in shaping public opinion about the trial of the British soldiers. The reporting of the trial was often sensationalized, with newspapers publishing lurid accounts of the proceedings and spinning them to suit their political agendas. This helped to further polarize public opinion about the incident and contribute to the growing political tensions that would eventually lead to the American Revolution.  This article is notable for its description of the events leading up to the Boston Massacre and its portrayal of the soldiers as being sent to protect a fellow soldier who had been threatened by the colonists. It also hints at the tensions between the soldiers and the colonists that would eventually boil over into violence.

Overall, primary sources have had a significant impact on our understanding of the politics of the Boston Massacre. Eyewitness accounts, trial transcripts, and newspaper articles all offer different perspectives on the events and highlight the ways in which politics influenced the interpretation of the incident. By examining these primary sources, we can gain a more nuanced understanding of the complex political climate of the time and the factors that contributed to the outbreak of violence in Boston in 1770.

Trial transcripts from the trial of the British soldiers involved in the Boston Massacre also provide important primary sources for understanding the politics of the time. The trial was highly politicized, with both sides seeking to use it as a means of advancing their agendas. The prosecution argued that the British soldiers had acted with malicious intent, while the defense claimed that they had acted in self-defense.  The trial transcripts offer insight into the legal and political framework of the time, as well as the ways in which justice was administered. The trial was a highly publicized event, and the proceedings were reported in newspapers throughout the colonies. This helped to shape public opinion about the incident and contributed to the growing anti-British sentiment that would eventually lead to the American Revolution.

However, it is important to note that primary sources can also be subject to bias and interpretation. Eyewitness accounts, for example, may be influenced by personal biases and emotional responses, while trial transcripts may reflect the perspectives of the judges and lawyers involved. Newspaper articles may be written with political agendas in mind and may not accurately reflect the facts of the case.  Therefore, it is important to approach primary sources with a critical eye and to consider the context in which they were produced.

Conclusion

The trial of the British soldiers for the Boston Massacre was a pivotal moment in American history. It demonstrated the power of the American legal system to deliver justice even in times of great political turmoil. John Adams’ defense of the soldiers helped to establish the principle that soldiers were subject to American courts and helped to outlaw murder as a crime that could be reviewed by the legal system. The trial also demonstrated the hyperbolic and politicized rhetoric surrounding the Boston Massacre and the broader political climate of the time.  Using primary source documents and the words of contemporaries, this essay has demonstrated how revolutionary sentiments affected the trial of the British soldiers for the Boston Massacre and its outcomes. While the facts of the event may not match the rhetoric, the trial served as a political rallying cry for overtaxed and disaffected anti-British rebels and demonstrated the power of the American legal system to deliver justice even in times of great political turmoil.

In conclusion, this essay shows that as British soldiers were acquitted at a very tenuous time in the nation’s history, political rhetoric, and its tension with emerging legal standards, allowed for anti-British and revolutionary sentiment to be tied to the events of the Boston Massacre, even spurring on the Massacre’s mythos as the story of oppressed colonists suffering under the thumb of a distant and financially demanding King.  In this way, the insights provided by primary source documents affords a more fulsome historical analysis of pre-revolutionary America and the events that defined it.  Today, these complex and intertwining new ideas, like the differing perspectives on the Boston Massacre from primary sources, are becoming features of historical pedagogy allowing for more in-depth analysis that enhances the experience for students and the public alike.

References

Primary Sources

Adams John, "Letter to William Tudor," August 25, 1815. Founders Online, National Archives.

.

Boston Gazette, March 12, 1770, reprinted in Edmund S. Morgan, The Birth of the Republic: 1763-89. Chicago. University of Chicago Press. 1956.

Bowdoin, James, Joseph Warren, and Samuel Pemberton. A Short Narrative of the Horrid Massacre in Boston: Perpetrated in the Evening of the Fifth Day of March, 1770. By Soldiers of the XXIXth Regiment; Which with the XIVth Regiment Were Then Quartered There: with Some Observations on the State of Things Prior to That Catastrophe. Boston, Massachusetts. Printed by order of the Town of Boston, and Sold by Edes and Gill, in Queen-Street, and T. & J. Fleet, in Cornhill. 1770.

Church, Benjamin, "An Oration, Delivered March Fifth, 1773." in The Revolutionary Era: Primary Documents on Events from 1776 to 1800. Ed. Carol Sue Humphrey. Vol. 1. Westport, Connecticut. Greenwood Press. 2003.

Elliott, Andrew and Rachel. Deposition, March 17, 1770, as cited in Boston Massacre Trials, ed. Karen Zeinert. Farmington Hills, Michigan. Greenhaven Press. 2007.

Hancock, John and Samuel Adams, "A Fair Account of the Late Unhappy Disturbance in Boston," Boston. Edes and Gill. 1770.

Miller, John C., The Soldiers' Trial: An Account of the Trial of the Officers and Men of the 29th Regiment, Charged with the Murder of Crispus Attucks, Samuel Gray, Samuel Maverick, James Caldwell, and Patrick Carr, on March 5, 1770, Together with a Short Narrative of Occurrences on That Night. Boston. Little, Brown, and Company. 1952.

Preston, Captain Thomas. "The Trial of Captain Thomas Preston." Boston. 1770.

Revere, Paul "The Short Narrative of the Horrid Massacre," in Boston. Printed and sold by the printers and booksellers. 1770.

Thatcher, Peter. 1752-1802. “An Oration Delivered at Watertown, March 5, 1776. To Commemorate the Bloody Massacre at Boston: Perpetrated March 5, 1770.” Watertown, Massachusetts. Printed and Sold by Benjamin Edes, on the Bridge. 1776.

Unknown. A Fair Account of the Late Unhappy Disturbance at Boston in New England: Extracted from the Depositions That Have Been Made Concerning It by Persons of All Parties: with an Appendix Containing Some Affidavits and Other Evidences Relating to This Affaire Not Mentioned in the Narrative of It That Has Been Published at Boston. London. Printed for B. White, in fleet-ftreet. 1770.

Warren, Joseph. "An Oration Delivered at Watertown, March 5, 1776," in The Revolutionary Writings of Joseph Warren. Ed. John R. Galvin. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund. 2011.

Secondary Sources

Hinderaker, Eric. Boston’s Massacre. Cambridge, Massachusetts. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. 2017.

Zabin, Serena R. The Boston Massacre: A Family History. Boston. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. 2020.