Was Anyone Punished for the Boston Massacre?

Yes; But the Soldiers Who Killed Five Got Off Virtually Scot-Free

Nov 10, 2009

The only person punished in connection with the events on March 5, 1770, was a boy who killed no one and possibly wasn't even at the scene. He got whipped.

The shootings by British soldiers on a mob in Boston's King Street (now State Street) resulted in the deaths of five Americans. The event was the culmination of months of disturbances involving soldiers sent to Boston to enforce customs regulations and civilians, such as the Sons of Liberty, who opposed the taxes and resented the presence of the troops in the town. The shootings shocked Americans throughout the thirteen colonies and undermined trust in British authority. Six years later, Americans declared their independence from Great Britain.

But what happened to the British soldiers and others suspected of involvement in the shootings?

Arrests and Three Trials

Arrests were made immediately following the bloody event and within the year three trials took place. One trial involved Captain Thomas Preston, the officer in charge of the soldiers on the street who fired that cold evening. The second involved the eight soldiers who fired weapons. The third involved three civilians who were suspected of also firing on the crowd, but from windows overlooking King Street.

Everyone knew that Preston did not fire any weapon. However, he possibly gave orders to fire and certainly failed to act quickly to order soldiers to stop firing once shooting began. But testimony at the trial was conflicting. Witnesses heard someone shouting "Fire," but amid much shouting, taunting, jostling and confusion, it was unclear whether Preston uttered the command. As for Preston's hesitation in ordering firing to stop, jurors were unconvinced that meant anything. Preston was acquitted.

As for the eight soldiers, jurors were apparently convinced that six of the men acted in self defense. Those six were acquitted. The remaining two, however, were convicted of manslaughter. That was a crime that would normally carry a death sentence.

Benefit of Clergy

However, a quirk in English law--which applied in colonial America--ultimately allowed the men to go free. Back in the 12th century, English King Henry II and the royal courts made it possible for every member of the clergy below a priest to claim immunity from trial or punishment in secular courts in any case involving an offense for which the cleric could be put to death.

Over the centuries, this immunity was limited to only certain capital crimes, such as manslaughter, but was extended to anyone who could read. Thus it was available to these two soldier convicted of manslaughter in Boston. They claimed this "benefit of clergy" and thus escaped the noose. However, they had to submit to having their thumbs branded. That was required to ensure that the men could not claim benefit of clergy a second time.

At first glance the acquittals of the military men seems astonishing considering the strongly anti-military mood of the town and the eagerness of some radicals in Boston to get a conviction. But in fact, the acquittals were virtually a foregone conclusion. In the case of Preston, his jury had several firm loyalists, making a conviction, which had to be unanimous, almost impossible. In the case of the soldiers, all jurors were from outside Boston, and thus less less likely to have an anti-military bias.

Also, by the time the trials took place, months had passed and the soldiers were no longer stationed in town. Passions had cooled considerably.

John Adams and Josiah Quincy

Furthermore, Preston and the soldiers had very good representation. In both trials they were represented by John Adams and Josiah Quincy. Even though both shared the radicals' opposition to the military in town, they were also two of the best lawyers available.

The trial involving the three civilians centered on the testimony of Charles Bourgatte, a boy born in France who worked as a servant for Edward Manwaring, a customs official. Bougatte claimed that Manwaring fired at the crowd from a window above King Street at about the same time the British soldiers were firing on the same crowd at street level. Bourgatte further testified that he was forced by another man, unidentified, to fire from another window on the crowd.

Discredited by Many Witnesses

This testimony was discredited by many witnesses, including several who were on King Street with a clear view of the windows where the shots were supposed to have originated. None saw shots fired from those windows.

Why would this servant concoct such a story? One witness said that Bourgatte confessed to him that he had been threatened by a leader of Boston's Sons of Liberty who wanted to see a customs man convicted in the shootings. At least one modern historian--O.M. Dickerson--has argued that Bourgatte was telling the truth--that shots were fired from windows. Dickerson back his assertion by pointing out, for example, that only five of the soldiers actually fired their weapons, yet eleven people were struck by bullets.

But back in 1770, jurors didn't believe the boy. They acquitted Manwaring and the other two civilians without even bothering to leave the courtroom to confer. Immediately following the acquittal, judges began the process of charging Bourgatte with perjury. He was convicted and sentenced to stand for one hour in the pillory and to receive 25 lashes.

Sources:

Dickerson, O.M. "The Commissioners of Custom and the 'Boston Massacre,'" The New England Quarterly, Vol. 27, No. 3 (Sept. 1954), pp 307-325.

The copyright of the article Was Anyone Punished for the Boston Massacre? in Colonial America is owned by Brian Deming. Permission to republish Was Anyone Punished for the Boston Massacre? in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.