The Duel - Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr

Kyle Chattleton: This is Mountaintop History, a podcast produced by the Thomas Jefferson Foundation at Monticello. 

Olivia Brown: Mountaintop History brings forward meaningful stories from this historic home and plantation — from the past and from the present.

Kyle Chattleton: My name is Kyle Chattleton. 

Olivia Brown: And I'm Olivia Brown.

Kyle Chattleton: Thank you for joining us. We hope you'll learn something new.

********

Kyle Chattleton: It is the most famous duel from American history. In the early morning hours of July 11, 1804, Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr gathered along the banks of Weehawken, New Jersey. Both would fire their pistols. Hamilton would not survive the encounter, passing away the next day from a mortal gunshot wound, while Burr was left, physically, unharmed.

What led to this moment? What exactly happened on the shore of the Hudson River? Why did Hamilton die and Burr live? And what were the consequences? In today’s episode of Mountaintop History, we dive into this legendary expression of distrust, questioned honor, and violence.

***

Alexander Hamilton was born on the island of Nevis in the Caribbean Sea in either 1755 or 1757, while Aaron Burr was born in 1756 in New Jersey. Both were born in British colonies. When the Revolutionary War broke out, both quickly enlisted and joined the Continental Army. Through their efforts they both became lieutenant colonels and married their respective wives before the conclusion of the war. After their time on the battlefield, they both became lawyers in New York City, and then New York politicians.

Throughout it all, Hamilton and Burr likely had multiple interactions with one another. But their rivalry seemingly began in 1791. Burr was running for a Senate seat in New York, and his competition was Philip Schuyler, Hamilton’s father-in-law. Schuyler was defeated, and Burr became a senator.

Afterward, Hamilton wrote:

“[Burr] is determined, as I conceive, to make his way to be the head of the popular party and to climb [rightly or wrongly] to the highest honors of the state; and as much higher as circumstances may permit. […] And I feel it a religious duty to oppose his career.”

Hamilton wasn’t the only one who looked upon Burr with suspicion. James Monroe argued, “I consider Burr as a man to be shunned. […] In short he is an unprincipled adventurer and whom it is better to get rid of at once.”

Throughout his career, however, Burr successfully managed to climb the ranks of political power despite the concern of his detractors. He had a keen eye on the headwinds of the nation, at first preferring to make what some around him considered “cautious” statements about political issues, but then staking his claim with the Democratic-Republican party’s cause.

In 1800, when Jefferson was the sitting Vice President as well as a leader of the Democratic-Republicans, he recognized Burr’s ascendancy in the party as well as his political genius. Burr had rallied support for the party’s cause in New York by helping elect a new Democratic-Republican majority in the State Assembly. It should be noted that Alexander Hamilton, as the leader of the opposing Federalist party, challenged Burr’s efforts and tried to hold the State Assembly for his party. But Burr ultimately proved successful once again. Later in the year, that new State Assembly majority chose New York’s presidential electors, thus ensuring that during the 1800 Presidential Election, New York’s slate of electors would go to the Democratic-Republican ticket.

As a reward for his efforts, Burr was named to that very ticket — Thomas Jefferson would be the party’s nominee for president, while Burr would be his running mate as vice president. 

This would lead to an awkward situation for Jefferson, Burr, and Hamilton. When the election concluded and the electors had been counted, Jefferson and Burr received more votes than the Federalist ticket; John Adams, in other words, would not be reelected president. The problem was that Jefferson and Burr had received the same amount of electors — there was a tie. While they both ran as a ticket, with Jefferson running at the head and Burr as a running mate, it was possible that Burr could actually become the next president based on the Constitution at the time. 

As a result of the tie, it was then up to the House of Representatives — with each state having one vote — to choose the next president. The Federalist party controlled the majority of states in that “lame duck” chamber, and now the election was in their hands. It was not an enviable position for the Federalists, nor, for that matter, Alexander Hamilton. Hamilton began hearing rumors and receiving letters that his Federalist colleagues in Congress might make a deal with Burr and choose him for president. While Hamilton disagreed with Jefferson’s vision for the country, he was far more worried about Burr. Hamilton explained to fellow Federalist Oliver Wolcott, Jr. that:

“It is now, my Dear Sir, ascertained that Jefferson or Burr will be President and it seems probable that they will come with equal votes to the House of Representatives. It is also circulated here that in this event the Federalists in Congress or some of them talk of preferring Burr. […] There is no doubt but that upon every virtuous and prudent calculations Jefferson is to be preferred. He is by far not so dangerous a man and he has pretensions to character.

“As to Burr there is nothing in his favour. His private character is not defended by his most partial friends. He is bankrupt beyond redemption except by the plunder of his country. His public principles have no other spring or aim than his own aggrandizement. […] If he can, he will certainly disturb our institutions to secure to himself permanent power and with it wealth.”

Wolcott responded to Hamilton by informing him that, indeed, some Federalists were considering a Burr presidency. Hamilton wrote back:

“There is no circumstance which has occurred in the course of our political affairs that has given me so much pain as the idea that Mr. Burr might be elevated to the Presidency by the means of the Federalists. […] It will expose them to the disgrace of a defeat in an attempt to elevate to the first place in the Government one of the worst men in the community.”

Perhaps having been influenced by Hamilton’s concern, after thirty-six votes failed to provide the majority necessary, several Federalist members of the House of Representatives withheld their votes, allowing their states to vote for Jefferson, thus making him the President of the United States. Burr became the Vice President.

The electoral tie and the rumors surrounding Burr and the Federalists caused Democratic-Republicans to be suspicious of him. Assemblyman Samuel Oswood wrote to Jefferson’s close confidante and future Secretary of State, James Madison, that “Mr. B[urr]’s Republicanism has been and still is questioned by many.” He then recommended Jefferson, rather than look to Burr’s counsel on important issues, instead seek out the advice of New York Governor George Clinton. Weeks later, Jefferson was communicating with Clinton. Hamilton and others could sense the growing rift; he wrote to Rufus King, “There is certainly a serious [break] between the chief and his heir apparent; a scism absolutely incurable. […] The effects are already apparent, and are ripening into a more bitter animosity.” In fact, during the 1804 Presidential Election, Burr was replaced by Clinton as the Vice Presidential candidate.

Keeping his eye on the winds of politics and fortune, realizing that he had lost the confidence of the national leaders in the Jefferson Administration, Burr decided to run for Clinton’s now-abandoned Governor seat. He lost.

But something occurred during that election that would forever intertwine Burr’s fate with Hamilton’s. Historian Ron Chernow writes:

“Sometime in March 1804, Hamilton dined in Albany at the home of Judge John Tayler. […] Present at Tayler’s table was Dr. Charles D. Cooper. […] Contemptuous of Burr, Cooper was delighted to sit back and listen to two of New York’s most illustrious Federalists, Hamilton and James Kent, denounce him bluntly at the table. So exhilarated was Cooper by this virulent talk that on April 12 he dashed off an account to his friend Andrew Brown.”

The letter was intercepted and published in a newspaper. Some questioned whether Cooper had told the truth, and so he wrote another letter that was subsequently published as well. Cooper wrote, “I could detail to you a still more despicable opinion which General Hamilton has expressed of Mr. Burr.”

Burr was at a low point in his career, and he like others of his time believed one’s honor was something sacred and, if challenged, was a serious offense. Aaron Burr was incensed. He demanded that Hamilton explain what was meant by the “despicable opinion.” Hamilton, in a lengthy response, said that he could not answer the question because Cooper’s phrasing was vague. He further explained to Burr that his request was an “embarrassment.” In another letter, Burr more pointedly argued that Cooper’s statement was about “dishonor.” Foreshadowing what would come next, he continued, “Political opposition can never absolve Gentlemen from the necessity of a rigid adherence to the laws of honor and the rules of decorum: I neither claim such priviledge nor indulge it in others.” In other words, they would duel.

Dueling was practiced throughout early United States history. It was not universally celebrated, however. George Washington thought engaging in a duel was “condemnable” to one’s “prudence & judgment.” Benjamin Franklin described it as a “murderous practice”: “How can such miserable Sinners as we are, entertain so much pride as to conceit that every Offence against our imagined Honor merits Death!”

But duels were not merely about death. Ron Chernow writes:

“Duels were also elaborate forms of conflict resolution, which is why duelists did not automatically try to kill their opponents. The mere threat of gunplay concentrated the minds of antagonists, forcing them and their [colleagues] into extensive negotiations that often ended with apologies instead of bullets. […] In the unlikely event that a duel occurred, the antagonists frequently tried only to wound each other, clipping an arm or a leg. […] The point was not to exhibit deadly marksmanship; it was to demonstrate courage by submitting to the duel.”

Aaron Burr requested the duel, and Alexander Hamilton submitted to it. Before the sun rose on July 11, 1804, the two men rowed from Manhattan Island to the shore of Weehawken, New Jersey. They arranged to travel with close and trusted friends, what were known in the world of dueling as “seconds.” Burr’s second was William Peter Van Ness, and Hamilton’s was Nathaniel Pendleton. Joining them all was Dr. David Hossack.

The seconds measured out ten paces between the duelers. Two pistols were then armed and given to Burr and Hamilton. They took their positions. Pendleton asked if both were ready. They confirmed. He said, “Present,” and both raised their pistols. There was a loud crack, and then another, with fire and smoke and drama. Hamilton was struck in the abdomen, while a tree behind Burr caught a stray bullet. The duel was over.

In a joint statement released by Van Ness and Pendleton, they detailed what happened next: “Genl Hamilton almost instantly fell. Col: Burr then advanced toward Genl H—n with a manner and gesture that appeared to Genl Hamilton’s friend to be expressive of regret, but without Speaking turned about & withdrew.”

Dr. Hossack remembered racing toward Hamilton: “He had at that instant just strength to say, ‘This is a mortal wound, Doctor;’ when he sunk away, and became to all appearance lifeless.” Hamilton would regain his senses, but only for a little while — he would pass away the following day from his wounds.

Then as now, there were disagreements over what exactly transpired. Did Burr or Hamilton fire first? The witnesses to the duel gave different accounts. Was Burr’s advance to Hamilton after shooting him evidence that he felt regret? Did Hamilton intend to hit Burr, or did he purposefully waste his shot by shooting high? Prior to the duel, Hamilton drafted a statement saying, “I have resolved […] to reserve and throw away my first fire, and I have thoughts even of reserving my second fire.”

But what history tells us is that this short, yet tremendous burst of distrust, questioned honor, and violence had a profound impact on the future: the Federalist party lost one of their most important leaders; Burr was indicted for murdering Hamilton and would continue to be chased by rumors about his political machinations, forcing him to abandon his hopes for success in politics; and the rivalry between these two Americans would help inspire, centuries later, one of the most celebrated and well-known Broadway musicals.

Olivia Brown: This has been another episode of Mountaintop History, a collaboration podcast between WTJU and the Thomas Jefferson Foundation. 

Kyle Chattleton: Join us for new episodes every two weeks on Apple and Google Podcasts, Stitcher, and the Virginia Audio Collective.

Olivia Brown: To learn more about Monticello or to plan your next trip, visit us online at Monticello.org.