The American Scholar

Black Lives and the Boston Massacre

ON MARCH 5, 1770, at a little after nine o’clock in the evening, men in uniform shot and killed an unarmed black man named Crispus Attucks. They got away with it.

This may seem like a radical way to introduce the Boston Massacre, that seminal episode in American history in which British soldiers fired on a mob, killing five men. But it is not far from how John Adams described the events to jurors while defending those soldiers at trial. The future president would later say that winning their acquittal was “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.” He engaged in some excellent lawyering, no doubt about it. The trial cemented Adams’s reputation as the archetypal lawyer-as-hero, a man willing to be hated in order to give individuals the chance to have their cause fairly heard. And it confirmed for Revolutionary British North Americans that theirs was a cause rooted in legal ideals. We have remembered the trial this way ever since: as a triumph of principle over self-interest or impetuous emotionalism. But an honest look at the transcript complicates the story by showing how racial prejudice contributed to the outcome. A critical part of Adams’s strategy was to convince the jury that his clients had only killed a black man and his cronies and that they didn’t deserve to hang for it.

I don’t teach the Boston Massacre to law students in order to talk about race. I teach it because it represents an important moment in the history of Anglo-American criminal procedure. But the trial of those British soldiers does prompt some inevitable reflections on where we’ve been and where we are on certain problems that are older than the Republic itself.

ON THAT NIGHT IN EARLY MARCH 1770, shortly after the bell housed in Boston’s Old South Meeting House tolled the nine o’clock hour, the bell began to ring again. To Bostonians hearing it that night, a bell tolling between hours meant a fire or some other emergency. People started pouring out of their houses with buckets in hand, while others leaned out of their upper-story windows, calling down to the street for more information. What they heard made some men put aside their buckets and grab weapons instead before heading out into the night. Others passed down a warning to their neighbors not to go out because there was no fire, only trouble with the soldiers. Someone was bound to get murdered, they said.

Boston had been the site of the fiercest resistance to a series of controversial taxes the British Parliament had levied on its North American subjects in the mid-18th century. Bostonians had been so insistent on

You’re reading a preview, subscribe to read more.

More from The American Scholar

The American Scholar4 min read
The Choice Is Ours
In December 1866, mathematician Mary Boole wrote to Charles Darwin: Do you consider the holding of your Theory of Natural Selection, in its fullest & most unreserved sense, to be inconsistent,—I do not say with any particular scheme of Theological do
The American Scholar13 min read
The Widower's Lament
STEVEN G. KELLMAN’S books include Rambling Prose, Redemption: The Life of Henry Roth, and The Translingual Imagination. Parting is all we know of heaven, And all we need of hell. —Emily Dickinson I had been asleep for a few hours when the policeman a
The American Scholar27 min read
Tales From an Attic
SIERRA BELLOWS lives in Ottawa. Her work has appeared in The New York Times, Gulf Coast, Meridian, The Greensboro Review, and the Scholar. 1. In February 1995, New York Governor George Pataki announced plans to close the Willard Asylum for the Insane

Related Books & Audiobooks