Delete comment from: Boston 1775
A letter from Boston published in the 28 Apr 1770 London Chronicle stated: “The people prepared to arm; expresses had been sent to the neighboring towns for assistance; and a resolution taken to give a general alarm, by firing the beacon; but by the persuasion of the Lieutenant Governor, the people were prevailed upon, after some time, to disperse; A barrel of tar, which was carrying to the beacon, was brought back, and the troops, which were under arms, retired to their barracks.”
This statement may have been based on alarmed rumors rather than solid knowledge, however. While some individuals, such as George R. T. Hewes, went for their militia weapons, there’s no clear evidence of a group response organized enough to make “a resolution.”
It’s also notable that the beacon had no tar barrel on it, making the act of lighting the emergency signal a much harder undertaking. Back in 1768, when the troops first arrived, a barrel was placed on the beacon, but it was found to be symbolic, not containing flammable tar. The sheriff took it down, and no one replaced it in the next eighteen months.
Had the Massacre led to an uprising against the troops and royal authorities in eastern Massachusetts in 1770, it’s unlikely the resistance would have spread as it did in 1774-75. The American press reporting on the Massacre tended to treat that event as a local grievance, not as a warning to every colony.
Dec 28, 2020, 7:57:37 PM