Boston Massacre Another American Revolution - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 6 Words: 1668 Downloads: 6 Date added: 2019/08/16 Category History Essay Level High school Tags: Boston Massacre Essay Did you like this example? On the fifth of March, 1770, a patriot mob began to harass a British sentry outside the Custom House on King Street in Boston, Massachusetts. As the harassment escalated, Captain Thomas Preston was called for backup. During the confrontation, among the shouts and yelling, there were cries for the squad to â€Å"fire!†. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Boston Massacre: Another American Revolution" essay for you Create order The squad responded to this command and ended up killing several colonists. A black sailor names Crispus Attucks, ropemaker Samuel Gray, mariner James Caldwell were instantly killed. Samuel Maverick and Patrick Carr were mortally wounded and would die later. The â€Å"Massacre†, as it was named later, led to a concerted effort by resistance leaders to inspire the â€Å"ire of citizenry†.   Speeches, demonstrations, and propagandistic images fueled the growing flames of discontent towards the monarchy. In the end, this â€Å"massacre† and the anger resulting from it were integral in the march towards the eventual Revolutionary war.   Tensions in Boston, 1770, were high. During this time, over two thousand British soldiers were occupying the city of Boston, which was populated by by over sixteen thousand colonists. The soldiers were present in order to enforce Britain’s laws, which the colonists were rebelling against. They found the taxes repressive and rallied over the slogan â€Å"no taxation without representation†. Skirmishes, a fight between small bodies of troops, especially advanced or outlying detachments of opposing armies, between British and soldiers became very common. They also became popular between patriots, who were loyal to the colonies, and loyalists, who were loyal to Britain. In order to protest these taxes, patriots vandalized stores that sold British goods and intimidated their customers.   On February 22, a group of protesters of patriots attacked a store owned by loyalists. A customs officer, Ebenezer Richardson, made an attempt to break up the riot. He fired out his window and onto the crowd below. His gunfire struck and killed Christopher Seider, an eleven year-old boy, who was in the crowd. This attack further enrage patriots and protesters, and helped escalate their protests. Shortly after this event, another fight broke out between local workers and British soldiers. No serious injuries resulted from it, but it helped set up the violence that was yet to come.   On the fifth of March, 1770, Private Hugh White was guarding the Custom House on King Street. The Custom House was containing the King’s money. Shortly after White was stationed at his post, a group of colonists joined him, and threatened violence. The violence was much more aggravated than previous encounters, due to recent events leading up to the riot. After a short amount of violent barating from the colonists, White fought back and struck one of the colonists with his bayonet. In response to this, protesters threw snowballs, ice, and stones at him. Bells rung through the street, and sent a rush of male colonists to the streets. The bells were usually a warning for fire, so the men naturally responded to it.   As the assault on White continued, he fell and was forced to call for backup. In response to White’s panic, Captain Thomas Preston arrived at the scene with several British soldiers. The Captain feared mass riots and was afraid that they would lose the King’s money, which was being stored in the Custom House. Both the colonists and the soldiers feared that bloodshed was inevitable. During the confrontation, colonists were reported to have dared the soldiers to fire, and other to have begged them to hold their fire. Captain Thomas Preston later revealed that he was told the colonists had a plan to â€Å"carry White off his post and murder him†. The violence soon escalated, and the protesters attacked the soldiers with stick and clubs. As this ensued, someone supposedly yelled â€Å"fire!†. The reports were mixed on which side ordered the command, or if the shot was intentional or not. After the first shot, other soldiers opened fire on the crowd. The gunfire struck and killed five colonists were killed, and six were wounded. The dead colonists included; Crispus Attucks, Patrick Carr, Samuel Gray, Samuel Maverick, and James Caldwell. Crispus Attucks was one the first to die, and was of African and Native American descent. These deaths are commonly believed as the first deaths of the American Revolution. From the colonist’s point of view, the violence seemed to be caused by the soldiers (Appendix), but Captain Thomas Preston’s account tells a different story. He claims that there was never any intention to ensue violence of any form. He also makes the claim that he never order his men to â€Å"fire†. The Captain claims that the colonists threatened and instigated the soldiers with phrases like; â€Å"lobster scoundrels† or â€Å"come on, you rascals†. He then stated that he attempted to persuade the men to retire peacefully, but clearly failed. Captain Preston was then asked by his men is the guns were loaded, he replied yes, and he was also asked if they should fire, to which he replied no. He claimed to have witnessed a soldier to receive a serious blow from one of the protesters, which caused the soldier to veer a bit to the side and fire into the crowd. The Captain questioned this, but was then, too, hit with a club. Captain Thomas Preston claimed that the soldiers’ lives were in imminent danger and pressured into firing by the protesting crowd of colonists. The colonists yelled phrases like; â€Å"damn your bloods- why don’t you fire?†. Shortly after this confusion, three or four soldiers fired into the crowd. He claimed to have yelled â€Å"hold your fire† and â€Å"stop firing†, but it was too late. Following this riot, four to five thousand people gathered on the street next to the â€Å"massacre†. They claimed to have wanted the deaths of the Captain and his men. After hearing this, the soldiers dispersed out of fear. On October 24, 1770, about seven months after the â€Å"massacre†, the trial of the soldiers accused of murdering the colonists was taken place. One of the people questioned was Samuel Hemmingway, who decided to testify against the British soldiers, specifically Matthew Kilroy. Kilroy shot and killed Samuel Gray, the owner of a ropemaking shop. In Hemingways testimony to the crown, he stated that one evening, about a week before the â€Å"massacre†, he overheard Killroy say that â€Å"he would never miss an opportunity to fire on the inhabitants† and that he had wanted to ever since he landed†. A contrasting testimony to this is that of Dr John Jeffries for the Defense. Dr Jeffries was Patrick Carr’s surgeon, and operated on him after he was shot, and died four days later. Jeffries testifies that Patrick was new to this kind of violence, since he was originally from Ireland. He testifies that during his last conversation with Carr, he forgave the man who shot him, and understood that the man was just defending himself against the protesters. For this reason, Carr was denounced by Samuel Adams and other patriots, who were angry that they could not use him to stir up more anti-british sentiments. In the depositions of John Wilme and Jeffrey Richards, they claimed that the soldiers were making threatening claims and actions against the colonists. Wilme claimed that about ten days before the â€Å"massacre†, Christopher Rumbly of the 14th regiment talk very much against Boston. Wilme claimed that he heard Rumbly say that â€Å"blood will run in the streets of Boston†. Jeffrey Richardson made a somewhat similar statement, and he claimed that on the Friday before the violent protest, eight to ten armed soldiers came to Mr. John Gray’s ropemaking shop. They challenged the soldiers to fight them, and tried to instigate violence. The deposition of Ebenezer Bridgham and argument of Josiah Quincy for the defense, found the colonists to be at fault. Bridgham testified that the soldiers were defending themselves against the colonists, as they were striking their guns with sticks. He claimed the patriot group were calling them cowards for bringing arms against unarmed men, and daring them to fire as they hit them. Josiah Quincy made a similar argument for the defense, claiming that the words the colonists used to berate the British sentry were so demeaning and disrespectful helped to provoke the soldiers into such violence. He also claimed that the soldiers tried to procure peace by saying things such as â€Å"if they molest me upon my post, I will fire!† and â€Å"stand off! I am upon my station!†. Quincy suggest that these words served as a warning to colonists, and the soldiers were only trying to do their jobs. The verdict was announced nine months after the â€Å"massacre†, the fifth of December, 1770. The jury that decided the verdict did not contain a single Boston citizen. Matthew Kilroy and Hugh Montgomery were found guilty of manslaughter while the other six soldiers, James Hartigan, William McCauley, Hugh White, William Warren, and John Carroll, were acquitted. Kilroy and Montgomery were able to avoid the death penalty through â€Å"benefit of the clergy†, which was used a loophole for first-time offenders. It was an early English law which held that non-religious courts did not have any legal power over clergymen. After the soldiers had â€Å"prayed the clergy†, each one was branded on the thumb with and â€Å"M†, for manslaughter. This would be visible for any future oaths or handshakes, marking them as killer for the rest of their lives. Yet for many colonists, the branding was still not enough to bring justice to the victims of the â€Å"massacre† and the town of Boston. The violence of the riot and the treatment of the soldiers both increased the feelings of turmoil in Boston, and the colonies in general. The new laws and taxes enforced by Parliament onto the colonies already brought anger to the colonies, but the violence by the British soldiers helped increase this hatred towards the crown. The anger and feelings of injustice fueled by the â€Å"Boston Massacre†and the trial that followed helped add fuel to the growing fire that was the American Revolution.

The Old Testament By Israelite People - 2063 Words

Adnan Alruwaili THL217 Dr. Brubacher Sep, 23, 2016 2,107 words Paper for Unit One The Old Testament, the Torah has beautiful chronological order and well organized as well that makes the readers to read it easily because it is streamline and in order moves from story to story. In this I will discuss all the topics of the unit one that we have studies in the class till date regarding moral, main themes and social ethics. Moreover, I will compare some of the famous stories form the Holy Quran and the Old Testament. For the very well understanding of the stories present in the OT Old Testament, YHWH, Tanakh first of all we need to understand some terms like such as social justice, force and violence. Over two thousand years, the Old†¦show more content†¦The Latter Prophets and the Former Prophets are including in the list of the Prophets and it presented by the N and N stands for Nevi’im. The writings and Kethuvim presents by the K (Harris and Platzner). The name of the God represent by the YHWH in Hebrew. To using the power for the something ethical stands as force simply. To force someone for to do unethical things while violence. Social justice stands for the right and normal (Brubacher). We have learned the story of creation is presents in the Book of Genesis. Sabbath represents that there is only six days of creation and the seventh days is meant for rest. The darkness, heaven, lights, humans, earth, Adam and Eve all of them is created by the God. After reading this the lesson is learnt that there should a one day of the rest for the social justice and the workers. It is clearly explained that creating Adam before Even does not mean that the males are dominant over female. After reading the Bible readers create a lot of misinterpretation and misunderstandings about many things like there is lot of superiority to Adam or Eve in the bible. A lot of misunderstanding and misinterpretation of the Bible comes from readers who think Adam or Eve has superiority in the Bible (Brubacher). In the Book of Genesis â€Å"So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them† (Gen. 1:27 NRSV). The interesting scene we noticed in the story of the Eden Garden. It is

Auditing Profession Challenges In Australia-Myassignmenthelp.Com

Question: Discuss About The Auditing Profession Challenges In Australia? Answer: Introduction Auditing has become important more than ever in this highly competitive market environment. The face of auditing has also changed and it has evolved as one of the crucial tasks within the company becoming something more than just regular checking of the accounting books. The development of IT, globalisation, increase in the legal and statutory complications and the involvement of the different auditors in different organisations have drastically changed the face of auditing over the years. The auditors play a critical role in the management of the financial information that helps to instill faith within the investors in the Australia which makes them interested in investing money. In the recent past the corporate collapses and scandals in financial reporting have affected this profession to a large extent and led to revamp in the laws and regulations related to audit. There are several challenges which the auditors face nowadays in their jobs that hinder their performance. Under the Australian Auditing model there are certain issues which act as challenges to the free operation of the auditors or the auditing firms (Houghton Campbell, 2013). The present report will taken into account these key challenges that hinder auditors activities and will discuss the regulatory attempts to improve audit quality in Australia. Discussion As stated earlier auditors play an important role in the management of investment for an organisation not only in Australia but also in other countries. From the corporate perspective auditors play an important role in Australia. Auditors are expected to perform their duties freely with independence but in the contemporary auditing environment auditors have not been able to perform their duties due to certain challenges that the Australian auditing model poses significant challenges for the auditors and the auditing firms. The very first challenge that is quite apparent in the present Australian market for the auditors is the rapid technological advancement. It cannot be denied that development in information technology is effective for industrial development but technology is likely to have huge impact on the roles of the auditors in the Australian market. The big four Auditing firms operating in Australia have already switched to new technologies which clearly shows that the importance of auditors will dip a bit because with the integration of big data and data analytics the gut instincts of Auditors will not be required since it will provide significant insights to the Australian investors (Hurtt et al., 2013). Hence what was called Auditors nose initially will be now transformed into digital system. The concepts like block chain system and robotic integration in companies like Deloitte and PwC have reduced the need for auditors since the robots are faster and could reiterate processes effectively w hich helps to make sure the audit is done properly. The roles of the auditors will definitely change given the consistent technological advancement taking place in the market. The extended power of the information technology will reduce the work of the auditors and the auditing firms will be compelled to invest money to cope up with the technological trend in order to survive in the Australian market (Houghton Campbell, 2013). A common challenge that the auditors in the capitalistic market of Australia have faced in the recent past is the compulsion that the organisation exerts on the auditors. It is undeniable that the auditing companies are dependent on their clients for revenue generation and hence it is important for the organisations to act as per the client which clearly hinders the performance of the auditors. Since there is a significant financial dependency of the auditing organisation on the client the auditing organisations have to work as per the clients taste and preference which is definitely unethical and audit employees have to alter their actions accordingly. Since the auditing firms have to listen to the clients they are working for it becomes tough to reveal the actual results which might result in the loss of clients and jobs for the organisations. Hence it is quite clear that auditing firms will have certain limitations which mean the auditors are not able to perform as expected under the Australian auditing model (Xu et al., 2013). In the recent past Auditor independence has been considered as one of the most important things which is important to perform the duties ethically and efficiently. Since the reporting of the financial statement becomes extremely important for the organisations it is important that the auditors get proper independence which would help them to come to the best possible conclusion regarding financial reporting which in turn will help the investors to a large extent. The code of ethics for professional accountants states that independence of minds and independence in appearance to get the best possible result from audit (Cannon Bedard, 2016). It is stated by the managers of the big four audit firms that the pressure from the upper level management is significantly high which influences the decision making of the lower level auditors. In the present Australian auditing model the main challenge of the auditors to make decisions under immense organisational pressure and since the auditing firms have become extremely focused on revenue generation and hence managing the ethical dilemma is a big challenge that could be seen in the contemporary Australian market. In the private sector auditing one company manages the other and this to a large extent limits the actions of the auditors and hence it is important to provide them with substantial powers to do their job properly (Zeff, 2012). Audit quality is an important aspect which mainly means that the auditor is able to achieve the audit objectives effectively and for that it is important for the auditors to get more responsibility and leverage which would help to make sure quality is intact. There have been regulatory attempts to improve audit operations under Australian auditing model. The Corporations Legislation Amendment Act 2012 streamlined the auditor independence by removing the existing auditor independence function. The Audit Standards ASA 200 focuses on providing room to the auditors to do their work effectively without any barriers. The Accounting Professional and Ethical Standards Board have released set of standards which supports the auditors to do their work properly. The Corporations Act 2001 has set support for the auditors to help them work with integrity and with professional skepticism which is important in this trade. The change in Audit partner rotation has been established as mandatory which i s effective for the auditors to operate independently and with integrity and professional skepticism. The auditors independence in Australia is managed by the 307C of the Corporations Act 2001. Overall it could be said that the present regulatory changes made are extremely effective and are helpful to provide independence to the auditors to work effectively (Carnegie Napier, 2012). Conclusion Auditing is extremely important in the contemporary business setting and hence it is important that the organisations operating in the Australian market are able to provide the audit services as per the standards. The big four firms of the Auditing industry have so far been able to operate in the market but there have been significant challenges which has hindered the operations of the auditors. The key challenges involved the advancement in IT, excessive pressure from the upper management to act as per the preference of the clients and the revenue generation factor. References Cannon, N. H., Bedard, J. C. (2016). Auditing challenging fair value measurements: Evidence from the field.The Accounting Review,92(4), 81-114. Carnegie, G. D., Napier, C. J. (2012). Accounting's past, present and future: the unifying power of history.Accounting, Auditing Accountability Journal,25(2), 328-369. Houghton, K., Campbell, T. (2013).Ethics and auditing(p. 354). ANU Press. Houghton, K., Ng, J., Jubb, C., Kend, M. (2013).The future of audit: keeping capital markets efficient(p. 700). ANU Press. Hurtt, R. K., Brown-Liburd, H., Earley, C. E., Krishnamoorthy, G. (2013). Research on auditor professional skepticism: Literature synthesis and opportunities for future research.Auditing: A Journal of Practice Theory,32(sp1), 45-97. Xu, Y., Carson, E., Fargher, N., Jiang, L. (2013). Responses by Australian auditors to the global financial crisis.Accounting Finance,53(1), 301-338. Zeff, S. A. (2012). The Evolution of the IASC into the IASB, and the Challenges it Faces.The accounting review,87(3), 807-837.