1) In March 1770, citizens of Boston were angry about the Townshend Acts passed by the British that taxed goods like paper, paint, glass and tea imported to the colonies. 2) The King and British soldiers were dissatisfied with the colonies because the colonists refused to buy British goods in protest of the Townshend Acts, causing financial issues. In 1768, Britain sent two regiments of troops to Boston to act as peacekeepers but this further upset colonists. 3) Three witnesses - Daniel Calef, Robert Goddard, and William Wyat - gave conflicting testimonies about whether Captain Preston ordered his soldiers to fire into the crowd, with two saying he did but describing

1. BOSTON MASSACRE QUESTIONS
By March of 1770, why were the citizens of Boston
angry?
The citizens of Boston were angry because the
British had pasted a tax law known as the
Townshend Acts. Although these acts angered the
people/colonists, it covered all the costs for their
needed items such as paper, paint, glass, lead, and
tea.
Why were the King and his royal soldiers
dissatisfied with the American colony?
They were dissatisfied with the colonists because, being
mad at the Townshend Tax act, they refused to buy any
British goods. Being worried about this, in 1768, Britain
senttwo regiment of troops into Boston acting as a peace
treaty; upsetting the colonists even more.
·What information will be important to keep in mind as
you hear the testimony of the witnesses?
Information that would be important to keep in mind is
that Daniel Calef, a Boston shop owner, and Question
Prosecution Witness, claims that he heard the officer
standing in a line to the right, ordering the soldiers to
fire twice. Robert Goddard, a citizen of Boston and also
a Question Prosecution Witness, claims that he saw
Captain Preston already standing there with his soldiers.
Then, as Captain Preston went behind his soldiers, he
gave the order to fire, saying ‘*BEEP* your bloods,
fire! Think I will be treated in this manner?!’Tehn,
William Wyat, a sea merchant, and, also being a
Question Prosecution Witness, claims that Captain

2. Preston gave the order to fire, saying that the Captain
gave the order to fire, and, after not one of his soldiers
responded, he stomped his foot, saying, ‘* BEEP * your
bloods, fire, be the consequence what it will!’ All three
of the men saw a crowd of people, in an uproar, holding
somewhat of a weapon.
·Do you believe that the officer Daniel Calef saw
Captain Preston? Why or why not?
I do not believe that Shop Owner, Daniel Calef, saw
Captain Preston. Why? Because all of the soldiers were
wearing that uniform, they are all matching. If you look
at the picture that Paul Revere drew, called the Bloody
Massacre, it shows that all the soldiers were wearing
that outfit. Daniel Calef could not be sure it was the
Captain. As for seeing his face plain in the moonlight?
That proves nothing. He could be easily mistaken for
another soldier. There is no solid proof that it was the
officer, no true evidence. What he saw could have been
merely a simple soldiers along with the rest of them.
·According to Robert Goddard, why did Captain Preston
give the order to fire?
According to Robert Goddard, The Captain fired
because an estimated group of 50 boys were all
throwing snowballs and the group, and the Captain
warned them to stop, and when they didn’t, he
supposedly fired.
·How were the testimonies of Daniel Calef and William
Wyat similar?
They are similar because both men think that Captain
Preston gave the order to fire. Both men are convinced
that the officer was with his soldiers at the time, and that

3. the shooting that happened was intended to happen.
How were they different?
Both men think that he was wearing something
different at the time, and both men claim that Officer
Preston said something different when he gave his order
to fire into the crowd.
·According to Richard Palmes, were the soldiers given
an order to fire?
The soldiers were never given any direct order by
Captain Preston to fire, and before, when he had a little
chat with the Captain, Preston claimed that he had no
means of shooting into the crowd.
Compare Palmes' testimony to that of the prosecution
witnesses. Where were each of the witnesses in relation
to Captain Preston?
The first witness, Daniel Calef, it does not mention
where he was at the time of the shooting, Robert
Goddard was right next to the captain when he gave the
order to fire, he claimed that he could touch him, and
looked him right in the eye. As for William Wyat, it did
not mention where he was standing at the time, either.
·According to Andrew, could Preston give the order to
fire?
No.
Why or why not?
He could not have given the order to fire, considering
that he was standing in front of his soldiers, and could
have very well been shot dead.
How does Andrew's account of the crowd differ from
the prosecutions?
Andrew claims that there was someone who gave an
order to fire, but it was not, in fact, the officer, but one

4. of his fellow soldiers. He also claims that the officer
was not to the right of his group of soldiers, but more as
in the front of them, thus almost killing him when they
started to shoot openly into the crowd.
·According to Thomas Handasyd Peck, why didn't
Captain Preston order his soldiers to fire?
He was in front of them and could have gotten himself
killed if he did order his soldiers to fire.
·What is the main argument of each attorney?
Richard Palme’s testimony is incorrect; because would
Palmes really place himself under the nozzles of a gun,
when he thought it was right because they were
defending their lives? John Adam’s closing statement is
correct because, as proven, Captain Preston knows the
language all too well to say murder’em, (as Robert
Goddard has testified), and the fact that Captain Preston
was standing in front of his soldiers means that he
would have been shot had he ordered them o fire.
Proving the Captain innocent.
Of the closing statements, who had the most convincing
argument?
John Adams had the most convincing argument.
Why?
Because he gave pure proof, solid hard evidence that the
captain did not yell fire.
·What of the three verdicts did you choose?
I chose Thomas Handasyd Peck, the fur exporter.
Why did you choose this verdict?

5. I chose this verdict because he has the most convincing
testimony/defending statement because he had proof, he
could back up what he was saying.