Following the series of Acts by Parliament, including the Townshend Acts, the protest movement in the colonies was growing strong. The Boycott of British goods was working. But not everyone agreed with the boycott. There were plenty of people loyal to the Crown. They came to be called Loyalists. Some of these people owned shops that were reportedly still selling British goods.
In Boston, it was common for young boys and teenaged boys to stand outside a business that was supposedly selling British goods. The boys hurled insults, animal dung, and threats at anyone that was intending to enter the business. Of course, this was bad for business as it scared most customers away. Overseeing the boys (and organizing them) were usually members of the Sons of Liberty. These men stood nearby watching the boys and giving approval.
On February 22nd, 1770, a group of schoolboys and members of the Sons of Libery gathered outside the shop of Theophilus Lillie. A sign also went up stating that the Lillie store was violating the boycott. A friend of Lillie's, Ebenezer Richardson, took down the sign thus incurring the wrath of the schoolboys and the men gathered nearby. Richardson fled to his home followed by a growing, hostile crowd. Threats were exchanged including Richardson saying, "By the eternal God, I will make it too hot for you before night." Richardson was threating to shoot. A sailor witnessed the crowd throwing rocks at the Richardson home and went to his aid. The rocks were breaking up the front porch, door, windows, and had hit Richardson's wife and children. The two went to find guns. When they returned, they stood at what was left of the front window but now there were boys in the backyard and to their front. So Richardson and the sailor were be attacked from the rear as well. Richardson knelt down, placed his gun on the windowsill, yelled another threat, and fired. Pellets from his gun hit one of the men, a young man's hand, and ripped open the chest and abdomen of young Christopher Snider (also spelled Seider)who was bending over to grab another rock. He died that very evening. The radicals in Boston made a big deal about the event and a huge funeral was organized and young Christoper was buried in the old Granary Burial ground - the first victim of violence during the troubles leading to the American Revolution.
WRITE A COMMENT - Okay, after reading this account, who is to blame for Christopher's death? What is your thoughts about what happened on that date Feb. 22nd, 1770. Once again, who is to blame for this?
Comment needs to be at least 2 sentences. Let's talk about your point of view tomorrow!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
57 comments:
I think that Christopher shouldn't have been killed. I mean, sure Christopher was throwing rocks at Ebenezer, but what are the odds that a rock could kill him? When Ebenezer took out his gun and started shooting, he knew there was a possibility someone was going to be killed; Christopher just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time when the shot was fired.
I also think that christopher shouldnt of been killed. Christopher was in the wrong place at the wrong time!
Christopher should not have been killed. I think that the shop keeper took thing out of porportion and should not have shot him. I also kind of think that it was the sons of libertys faft because they had the kid diss the store.
its very sad that a 12 year old boy got killed. But why did the Sons of Liberty use children to protest? If I was Ebenezer I would have fired if there was a mob outside my house.
Also if he didn't shoot the mob would have proably ransacked his house and hurt his family.
I think that Christopher was just standing up for what he believed in by telling people not to shop at that guys store. They didn't have to go and attack the guy and his family, but Ebenezer was the one who fired the gun and Christopher died.
~megan
I think that it was mastly the fault of Ebenezer Richardson. Christopher was wrong to be taunting and throwing rocks, but right (I mean morally right) to be boycotting the British goods. It is true that Christopher should have had a punishment, but death was most definitely not the right one. A somewhat innocent boy? He shouldn't die. He did not deserve to die-the only thing is is that it might not have been intentional on the hand of Ebenezer Richardson. Still, he should have known that a shot could kill someone even if he only had scaring away as the intent.
- julia h!!!!!!!!!!!!
i mean.......!!!!!!!!!!!!!(peace, love, and exclamation points)!!
I also agree with the point that Christopher should not have been killed. They should not having been throwing rocks at Ebenezer but the consequence for Christopher should not have been death. I also think that it was the sons of liberty to blame for teaching the young boys this cruel behavior.
:D
Victoria
Chroistopher should not have died, and that it is Richardson's fault. although maybe fromt he point of Richardson it was wrong to boycott British goods, he took things too far by getting out a gun. To Christopher he was doing what was right, and he was under the infulence of others, so the whole woycotting cannot be fairly called all his fault at all. Especially because Christopher was a boy, it was very wrong to shoot him.
I think it was the mob of angry children and men who followed Richardson to his home, and broke is windows, and tried to enter his house, hurting his children. Richardson shot in DEFENSE, trying to protect himself and his family.
It is unfortunate that Christopher was killed while bending down to hurl another rock at Richardson.
- Sameer
I think that Christopher shouldn't have been killed. There should have been some sort of punishment for him but definetly not death. All he did was laugh a few people! That shouldn't have been punished by death. I don't think that the old man meant to shoot Christopher, he just happened to be the one that was shot. It's soooo sad that a 12-year-old boy got killed!
~Caroline H :D
I dont think that Christopher deserved to die. He shouldn't have been throwing rocks though because obviously that was dangerous and stupid and Ebenezer had to do something. Still, The punishment for throwing rocks is definitly not death.
-Grace :-)
I think Christopher shouldn't not have been killed becuase he didn't do anything harmfull to Richerdson. He was just joining along with the ohter boys so he wouldn't be outcasted. The crowed is to be blaimed because they were the ones who first started to sabatoge the house
I think that it wasn't fair that Christopher died. I mean, sure, he was throwing rocks at Ebenezer, but it really wasn't his fault. The Sons of Liberty should not have thought them that doing that was right.
~Kendall Ross
I don't think that Christopher should have died. He was doing some harmful stuff like throwing rocks and other items but if you were to punish him, it should not have been through killing him. He did NOT deserve to die!
-Hannah L
I dont think that he should have been shot, he was just standing up for what he believed in. What i would have done if i were Ebenezer i would have fired some shots in the air to scare them off, if they started entering my house and breaking things, they could hurt my family so my last resort would be to shoot. (remember i am speaking as if i am in Ebenezer's position.
Jason Carlson
I think that Christopher shouldn't have been killed. I mean, Ebenezer was shooting at a mob, so chances are he is going to hit someone. He could have fired it into the air to scare them off. But the Sons of Liberty shouldn't employ kids if there is a chance they'd get hurt.
Christopher just happened to be the one that got hit, so I guess it is kind of both Ebenezer's and the Sons of Liberty's fault.
I think it was totally the storeowners fault. The boys were trying to help the U.S and the man was hurting them. It doesn't make sense why the boy was shot over business.
I don't think it was fair for him to die, and I think that it was all the storekeepers fault. Christopher just ment to have some fun, not to get killed...
-Catherine
I think Christopher should not have been killed. I know he was throwing rocks at Ebenezer, and he should be punished, but not like this. Throwing rocks at Ebenezer should not deserve death. I think it was the Sons of LIberty's fault. They should not have encouraged the children to throw rocks. Ebenzer should of thought twice before shooting!
i dont think christopher should have been killed but i dont no what else the shop keeper would have or could have done. it was a tough situation and its hard to blame any one for what happened. just bad luck.
I think that Christopher shouldn't have been killed. Also it was the Sons of Liberty's fault because they were having children protest. He shouldn't have been throwing rocks, but death did not need to occur for his behavior.
I think that Ebenezer should not be blamed completely for killing the kid, Christopher. The kids were the ones to follow him to his house and Ebenezer warned everybody 2-3 times. Also I think Ebenezer thought his life and his family's life was in danger, or at least all of his possessions, so he fired his gun. He didn't really want to kill anyone, he just wanted to scare them away. I do not think that the killing was all Ebenezer's fault.
~Brooke!!!!!
It's kinda Christophers fault. I mean come on Ebenezer warned him and they should not have been throwing rocks. They should have protested in a non-violent way.
I think that everbody was in the wrong. First of all the Sons of Liberty should have hired young boys to do their dirty work. But then the boys should have left when they were threatened to get shot. Ebenezer should not have fired a gun but asked someone to get the regulars or the police. I think Ebenezer didn't want to kill anyone but just scare them away. Even so the accident cannot be blamed on one person but everyone involved.
i think that it was his own fault that he was killed because if he hadnt been leaning over to pick up rock to throw at the house then he would have been shot in the head and died. He would have been shot most likely in the lower part of the abdomin and not died. So it was still his fault that he was shot because he didnt have to be throwing rocks at the house and if he hadnt been he wouldnt have died
It was soooo wrong for christopher to be killed. That crazy man (Richardson) should have calmmmed down.
Gosh..........poor christopher
MAAHUM!!!
I don't think that Christopher should have been killed, but the American radicals were to blame. The members of the sons of liberty were falsely influencing the young boys to take place in unrighteous activity. He was in the wrong place at the wrong time and the only people that are to blame, are the overseer's.
Stay Classy San Diego
I think that it is Christopher's fault that he was killed. Ebenezer warned them by pointing hit gun out. He did this for his own safety even though it was wrong. He didn't mean to shoot the kid alone. I'm not saying that Ebenezer should not be punished. I'm half and half or at war with myself.
And there you have it,
Simon
I don't think it is anyones total fault for Christopher's death. Ebenezer shouldn't have taken the sign out. the kids had a right to disagree with him but not to throw rocks at him. And I mean Ebenezer has to defend himself, his wife and kids were hit my the rocks and it was rely just a lucky shot that happened to hit Christopher.
Christopher didn't deserve to die, and shouldn't have been killed. We will never know if he was going to throw that rock that he was picking up. I agree with Julia H. He was right for standing up for what he believed in (boycotting the British), but wrong about the way he went about it. I feel that an innocent child was killed that day. He was younger than most of the people in our grade. That really gives you something to think about, and how England treated the colonies.
--Olivia W <3
I don't think Christopher should've been killed. I mean, he was just throwing rocks at Ebenezer, I don't think Snider could've have killed him with a rock. Ebenezer of course had to know what was going to happen if he shot... he would kill someone and that someone just happened to be innocent Christopher Snider. So sad.
It is unfortunate a 12 year old boy was killed. But it was the sons of liberty fault for using childeren to protest. Ebenezer might not have known that he was going to kill christopher, but it was just wrong place at the wrong time.
Christopher was trying to destroy this man's home! The man had every right to defend his home and well being! I cannot believe that people are angry with this man for defending himself!
Joey Harris
Christopher should not have been killed! The shopkeeper was totally out of line shooting at the mob. Shooting into the air would scare them away and be equally effective, and a twelve year old wouldn't have to die. It was wrong to throw rocks at the man, but Cristopher shouldn't have been punished by being killed.
I believe it was a misfortune that Christopher was killed but, do we know that the Sons Of Liberty were making the kids do this or not? Not officially. For all we know Christopher could have really believed in not shopping in these stores. If so, he should have known the risks he was taking. I still do not agree that the store owner should have shot him but, if he died fighting for what he believed in than that isnt as bad!
~Meghan Casey :P
I do not think that Christopher deserved to die. He didnt do anything wrong. It was just unfortunate that he got hit when Ebenezer started shooting with his gun. So sad:(
Kimberly R.
I think that it was partially both peoples fault that he died, the Sons of Liberty should have never let the kids do that, it just causes problems!!! But, the sailor and the shop owner should not have been shooting at little boys!
Okay, i guess it's sad that a 12 year old had to die, but he got himself involved. He might have been put up to it by the sons of liberty, but if there was a mob outside my house, i'd shoot, i wouldn't care. they are threating my family, wife, kids...
In a way, they were both wrong. i agree with some of the other people that firing in the air would have been just as affective, but the shopkeeper felt threatend. We are only human...
I don't think that Christopher should have been insulting or throwing rocks in the first place. If they wanted to boycott on their own, that's fine, but they shouldn't have used violence to convince others to. But, I guess if everybody else was, you might have become a target if you just stood out and didn't do anything. So, it's kind of hard to blame him. Also, I can't really blame him for shooting, since they didn't respond to his original threat to shoot anyway and he must have felt endangered. So, I think it was mostly the protestors' fault.
Ben
I believe that what happened to Christopher was unfortunate. However Ebenezer should not be held at fault he responded to the violent act done upon him and his family in a violent manner. If put in this situation he felt that his family was in serious danger and reacted to it in a reaction he felt that was in the best interest of him and his family. Further he should not have been looked upon as an evil man. The protesters should have been able to face the consequences of there violent rash acts.
I don't think that Christopher should have been killed, but I think that it was accidental- I mean he was in panic from a lot of people chasing him. I think that the whole thing got way out of hand.
oh yeah- this is alexandra meyers
I don't think that Christopher should have been killed. Even though he was being mean to people by throwing rocks at them; he shouldn't have been killed. Something else should have happened to him.
Chelsea
I think they both had a part that was bad in it, but someone being killed was going to far. The shop keeper was not right on bring a gun to this, but Christopher should have stopped after it got to far. I do not think the shop keeper tried to shot the boy.They are both at fault her, but the boy was killed for it.
I think that Christopher didn't deserve to be killed, he was just unlucky. But Ebenezer shouldn't be blamed... It was in his own defence. If there was a mob of people throwing rocks at your house that were hitting your wife and kids and you had a gun, you would probably fire it a couple times, justt because that would be the only thing to make them stop.
~Griffin
I beleive that it is the sons of libery's falt for this unfortunant happening. They should have never put, or allowed, the childeren to be in that kind of position. They should be held responsible for it. It was unfortunant that the boy was killed, and I'm sure that the shopowner did not mean to kill little childeren; but he thought he was in mortal danger, and acted in self defence.
I think it is the mob of kids fault that he got killed but the stroeowner did not have to kill him. the storeowner was trying to make money because if he did not sell his products then he would have lots of stuff sitting around that could get him money.
Blake
I think that Snider shouldn't have been killed. He was following what everyone else was doing. If a lot of people, including adult role models, are doing something, then a 12 year old kid is likely to imitate that. Ebenezer Richardson and the Sons of Liberty are to blame. It was Ebenezer's fault because he pulled the trigger, and could've made a much better decision, (such as shooting in the air to scare the mob away...). It was the Sons of Liberty's fault because they gave their approval to the boys. If older role models are telling you that what you are doing is ok, then you actually think that it is. That approval ended up leading to the death of Snider if you think about it. Poor kid.
-Jerry
I honestly think that both the school kids and ebenezers fault. I mean it was Christopher fault by throwing the rocks at the guys houses and it was also richardsons fault for firing his gun. But richardson had no choice, if he didn't fire he would been killed or everything he had owned would have been destroyed.
i think christopher should not be killed. he did not do alot wrong. All he did was throw some rocks. all kids rebel at one time.
From, CHARLIE JOHNS
It was both, Christopher deserved to be reprimanded. Yet he didnt deserve to die.
Post a Comment