This is lecture number 21. We’re going to talk about the Burr-Hamilton duel, having
discussed a little bit about the culture of honor last time. We’re going to watch it
play out here.
I want to give you another context for this – honor among revolutionary gentlemen. Of
course, Burr and Hamilton aren’t the only ones to fight a duel; there are many duels
fought. The process toward a duel is begun many times. They don’t always culminate
in a duel, obviously. And of course, I want you to keep in mind, this is the early republic
and an extralegal system of justice for the political elite in the early republic.
Significance – I’ve heard one historian remark that the American Revolution was different
from most revolutions in that the revolutionary elite did not turn on themselves. You see
the mass violence in Paris during the French Revolution, and of course, in the 20th century
with the Russian and Chinese and Cuban Revolutions, you see the revolutionaries turn on themselves.
The American founders – for the most part – did not do this. The one exception here
is the Burr-Hamilton conflict, and this conflict is not so much over public policy as it is
over personal animosity, I believe.
A quick synopsis – On the morning of July 11, 1804, Vice President Aaron Burr and former
Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton fought a duel across the Hudson River in New
Jersey. There, in accord with the customs of the code of dueling, they exchanged pistol
shots at 10 paces. Hamilton was struck on his right side, and he died the following
day. Though unhurt, Burr found his reputation suffered an equally fatal wound. This is the
most famous duel in American history. Both participants were casualties in this sense.
Hamilton lost his life and Burr lost his political career.
Causes of this duel – A political rivalry extending back over 15 years. Burr, of course,
a Republican and ally of Jefferson in the election of 1800. In the state of New York,
which had traditionally been Hamiltonian territory and Federalist, of course, you remember that
Hamilton encouraged Federalist support of Jefferson, his sworn political enemy over
Aaron Burr in the election of 1800.
Hamilton’s strong endorsement of Jefferson as quote “by far not so dangerous a man
as Burr”. Hamilton goes on to say that Jefferson possessed quote “solid pretentions to character”.
These remarks, of course, made their way back to the Vice President and could not help but
leave a well of hostility in Burr.
Hamilton went on to say, about Aaron Burr, that his private character is not defended
by even his most partial friends. We’re clearly crossing the line from attacking one’s
political program to personal attacks, and this of course, lies outside the bounds of
the code of honor. Hamilton went on to say about Burr, that he is quote “bankrupt beyond
redemption except by the plunder of his country”. Clearly again, these are fighting words and
they’re going to get worse.
Hamilton’s criticism of Burr continues. Burr was unprincipled both as a public and
private man, a man whose only political principle is to mount at all events to the highest political
honors of the nation. So Hamilton is accusing Burr not of civic virtue or disinterest in
the outcome, but in personal aggrandizement, and an ambition that exceeds the code of honor
and of republicanism.
In June of 1804, less than a month before the duel, the Albany Register, a newspaper,
reprinted a letter from a local doctor who reported an anti-Burr speech by Hamilton and
concluded, “I could detail you a still more despicable opinion, which General Hamilton
has expressed of Mr. Burr”. Hamilton was apparently at a tavern and had been over served.
Legend has it, he got up on the table and was leading the crowd in song, and as was
Hamilton’s habit, he began to talk and he talked too much, and you can imagine the Vice
President upon reading and seeing the word ‘despicable’ describing his character.
This, of course, will trigger the ritual of the code of honor between Burr and Hamilton.
Let me talk again about the code, so this is fresh in your mind. It’s a ritual of
violence; it’s designed to ensure honor and very importantly, to protect a man’s
future political – what’s the word I’m looking for – utility. In other words, to
defend one’s honor is public allows a man to continue to be a political leader in the
country. To back down, or to allow one’s honor to be besmirched, reveals a man to be
little more than a puppy and not capable of being a political leader. Again, these fights
are called interviews. This is to ensure deniability. For instance, in the Burr-Hamilton duel, neither
the row man who took the two men across the Hudson River, nor the doctor, would be allowed
to watch the duel so that they could deny participation in court.
Burr demanded satisfaction and that is a key word, satisfaction from Hamilton regarding
those remarks about his character being ‘despicable’. Burr wants to know exactly what Hamilton meant.
What exactly did he say? What was the context? And he wants an apology for it. In other words,
he wants satisfaction, public satisfaction, from Hamilton. Remember that Hamilton would
refuse to satisfy Burr’s demands. This is what will lead to the actual duel.
It’s interesting. You can go online, and I believe we have a link here in the course
to take you to the Burr-Hamilton correspondence. It’s very interesting to read this correspondence.
It’s almost like a tennis game, where Burr serves, demanding satisfaction, and initiating
the code of honor. Hamilton realizes immediately, having been involved in these affairs of honor
before, that he’s in trouble and that he’s going to either have to publicly apologize
or in some way satisfy Burr’s anger, and to alleviate the tension between the two.
Hamilton is never able to do this. He’s never able to bring himself to an open apology.
Hamilton’s letters are long and legalistic. Burr’s letters are short and to the point.
And you can see that – what’s the quote here? Hamilton goes on and on and on in his
legalistic way, and then at the end he says, “I can only regret the circumstances and
must abide the consequences. In other words, Hamilton is admitting that he cannot make
a full, open, public apology and he must now abide the consequences, which of course, is
a duel.
Burr’s reply after years of having his character trashed by Hamilton in public, Burr says quote,
“These things must have an end.”
The duel itself, everybody says on the morning of the duel neither Burr or Hamilton showed
any anxiety at all and went about their business as usual. Hamilton had the choice of weapons,
as he was the one challenged. He selected his brother-in-law’s custom-made dueling
pistols equipped with hair triggers. Such pistols were notoriously inaccurate because
of their weight, and they had smooth bores. The weapons we use today, of course, have
rifled bores, which can throw a projectile at great velocity and accuracy. These smooth-bore
pistols were notoriously inaccurate because they did not have a rifled barrel. That ball
of lead would fly out of that pistol and was liable to go anywhere. So it was very difficult
to hit a target with these type of weapons.
As the challenged, it was Hamilton’s choice of position, and he chose poorly according
to everyone there, facing the rising sun.
Now, it’s important to understand that Burr and Hamilton’s seconds, their associates,
made all of these arrangements, not the principal’s. The seconds on the scene, Burr and Hamilton’s,
agree that 2 shots were fired and that Hamilton was mortally wounded.
Now let’s talk about what happens immediately after. Hamilton told the doctor, and it was
Hamilton’s doctor that the 2 sides agreed would be present on the dueling field, Hamilton
told the doctor immediately upon being shot that this is a mortal wound. Burr said, upon
seeing Hamilton fall, quote, “I must go and speak with him.” An interesting remark
to make upon just shooting Hamilton. But Burr’s second said, “No,” that we had to get
out of here, and he grabbed him and took him back to the boat to be rowed back to Manhattan.
Burr’s bullet fractured Hamilton’s ribcage. It entered his side a few inches above his
2nd vertebrae. Even with the benefits of modern medical science, Hamilton’s wound would
have likely been fatal. Both seconds issued a joint statement, which claimed that both
principal’s had acted in accordance with the code of honor. Hamilton’s last will
and testament claimed “no ill will” towards Colonel Burr and that he had “resolved”
to reserve and throw away my first fire. By throwing away your fire, you could simply
shoot into the ground, thereby allowing your opponent the opportunity to be magnanimous
and to also shoot into the ground. You could shoot into the air, allowing your opponent
to return the favor and shoot into the air. This is how duels usually end up. Both men
now shake hands and they go have coffee and breakfast. Here with Hamilton and Burr, however,
it did not work out that way.
It’s also interesting that as the 2 sides were negotiating on whose doctor would be
present, that Burr readily agreed that Hamilton’s doctor would be fine, saying that a doctor
was not even necessary. This has left historians in a bit of a quandary because if Burr says
a doctor is not necessary, does that mean he intended to throw away his fire anticipating
that Hamilton would do the same? Or does it mean that Burr had every intention of killing
Hamilton?
A couple of explanations here to try to sum this complicated issue up – The seconds
agreed that there were 2 shots fired. Let’s track these 2 shots for a moment. Burr’s
second said that a branch above Burr’s head was clipped by a bullet and that this branch
had fallen and had startled Colonel Burr. The second shot, of course, is the one that
shattered Hamilton’s ribcage and inflicted a mortal wound. Was it Burr’s intention
to kill Hamilton? Probably, although it was not unusual for a duelist to shoot his opponent
in the leg, in the thigh, or in his rump, not being a fatal shot but certainly indicated
displeasure with your opponent. It’s difficult to know. My guess is that Burr intended to
do what he did.
Yet, Burr obviously showed regret upon seeing Hamilton dangerously wounded. So I don’t
know if this is just years of being associated, at times being friends; it’s difficult to
say.
A couple of conclusions here – I want to emphasize that the reason these 2 men fought
this duel was to ensure their future political utility in the early republic. Both Hamilton
and Burr were still young men, relatively speaking. They both assumed that a political
career stretched out in front of them, although both men at the moment were at a low point
in their lives. Burr, his character being traduced by Hamilton in this letter in the
Albany Register, has to respond to this. Otherwise, he’s revealed as a man without honor. Once
these letters become public, Hamilton also has to respond or he jeopardizes his honor.
So these 2 men are caught in a very dangerous dance and there’s no way out unless a full
apology is made or unless some sort of settlement can be arrived at, there is no way out of
this dance of honor except the dueling ground. So remember that these 2 men, for whatever
spiteful language might have been used, whatever political differences they had, the reason
they fought that day was to ensure that they could continue to be useful political leaders
in the young United States.
Thank you.