The Boston Massacre

Evidence of this quest for a principled rule of law appeared in two ways during the late eighteenth century. The first was in the passage of antiriot statutes by the colonies. The second was a considered effort by even revolutionary leaders to inculcate what Samuel Adams in 1784 declared to be "Decency and Respect due to Constitutional Authority." "[T]hose Men," Adams continued, "who under any Pretence or by any Means whatever, would lessen the Weight of Government lawfully exercised must be Enemies of our happy Revolution and the Common Liberty." ²⁶

Revolutionary leaders, with all of their growing commitment to popular will, appreciated that principles of natural law and constitutional authority had to be maintained. Taunting citizens of Boston, for example, had precipitated the famous Boston Massacre in 1770, after one of them had suggested to a British soldier that he could "go clean my shithouse." ²⁷ The British troops responded by killing several of their tormentors; tempers were sufficiently frayed that the whole city might have exploded. Governor Hutchinson displayed calm leadership, but even more important were the roles of John Adams and Josiah Quincy in providing the accused soldiers with a brilliant defense in court. "The eyes of all are upon you," Quincy told the jurors. It is "of high importance to your country, that nothing should appear on this trial to impeach our justice or stain our humanity." ²⁸ Some soldiers were convicted of manslaughter, but the punishments were light. The trial had done little to settle fundamental differences, but it did reinforce the underlying commitment to breaking the emerging popular will theory of law with a belief in a rule of law.

Extralegal, direct popular action against the British authorities seemed suitable, even necessary for the preservation of colonial rights. The law took shape in response to events; the colonists moved further and further away from the notion that they could adequately protect themselves exclusively through the British constitution. Rebellion offered the means of breaking from the English hold, but the revolutionary leaders also needed, in their continuing concern to be legal, a means of legitimating that break.

Date: 2015-01-29; view: 948