On Friday, the 2d instant, a quarrel arose between some soldiers of the 29th, and the rope-makers journeymen and apprentices, which was carried to that length, as to become dangerous to the lives of each party, many of them being much wounded. This contentious disposition continued until the Monday evening following, [March 5th] when a party of seven or eight soldiers were detached from the main guard, under the command of Captain Preston, and by his orders fired upon the inhabitants promiscuously in King Street, without the least warning of their intention, and killed three on the spot; another has since died of his wounds, and others are dangerously, some it is feared mortally, wounded. Captain Preston and his party are now in jail. An inquiry is now making into this unhappy affair . . . Sam Adams, John Hancock, and others, Committee of the Town of Boston. Required:
a. Does the source above seem bias?
b. Who do you feel this letter is meant to bash?
c. Do you think the citizens were actually helpless against the British?

Explanation:

a.From the article it does not seem that the source is being biased. Instead, they are simply stating the facts of the violent event that unfolded between both parties involved in the altercation.

b. This letter was mainly meant to bash the Captain and soldiers of the 29th, as they were the ones that fired the first shots. Under the order of Captain Preston, who escalated the altercation drastically by ordering the soldiers to unload their weapons on the inhabitants without need or warning.

c. From the information provided, I would say yes they were helpless. Mainly due to the fact that the soldiers apparently had guns while the citizens did not. Therefore, there was very little that they could have done to defend themselves when the soldiers began firing.

a.) a poor farmer, due to the fact that they would want to be freed from british rule.

during both period congress passed law restricting the civil liberties of american citizen that meet with the overall public support is the one statement that explain the rate scare of the 1920 and 1950 is very similar