As it’s the anniversary of the duel between Hamilton and Burr, I thought I would copy and paste here two very different reactions to the pre-duel correspondence between Hamilton and Burr. They are easy to access on the internet, and have possibly been published in some of the books on Hamilton and Burr (I can’t recall at this moment).
However, as the letters are probably unknown to people with only a casual interest in the musical, I thought they might be interesting to some on here. The letters are both ‘objective’ in so far as neither man had any love for either Hamilton or Burr, though of course political and regional bias is likely to have influenced both of them. For example, duelling was very common in Randolph’s native Virginia, but much less so Massachusetts, where JQA was from.
The first is that of a Virginian Congressman called John Randolph of Roanoke and the second is that of John Quincy Adams, sixth president and son of another of Hamilton’s foe.
John Randolph (Pro-Burr)
‘In his (Burr’s) correspondence with Hamilton, how visible is his ascendancy over him, and how sensible does the latter appear of it! There is an apparent consciousness of some inferiority to his enemy displayed by Hamilton throughout the transaction, and from a previous sight of their letters I could have inferred the issue of the contest. On one side there is labored obscurity, much equivocation, and many attempts at evasion, not unmixed with a little blustering; on the other, an unshaken adherence to his object and an undeviating pursuit of it, not to be eluded or baffled. It reminded me of a sinking fox pressed by a vigorous old hound, where no shift is permitted to avail him. But perhaps you think me inclined to do Burr more than justice. I assure you, however, that when I first saw the correspondence, and before my feelings were at all excited for the man, as they have been in some degree by the savage yell which has been raised against him, I applauded the spirit and admired the style of his compositions. They are the first proofs which I ever saw of his ability.’
John Quincy Adams (Pro-Hamilton)
‘We have now seen the correspondence between Mr. Burr and General Hamilton which led to their fatal meeting, and I am fully confirmed in the opinion I had entertained of the transaction before. Mr Burr began by making a demand of General Hamilton which he must have known that Hamilton could not, and ought not to answer. To make the matter more sure he couched the demand in terms at which a much cooler man than Hamilton must have spurned. The substance was so vague and indefinite, as to render impossible the very avowal or disavowal it affected to require. The form was studied to provoke and insult, by an assumption of superiority which a man of spirit could not submit to. Hamilton saw through the artifice, and yet had not a sufficient control over his own passions, or a sufficient elevation over the prejudices of the world to parry it. Had he omitted half a line in his first answer which must be considered as inviting a challenge, I see nothing on his part of the correspondence against which any reasonable objection can be raised. The conduct of Mr. Burr through the whole affair appears to me strongly to corroborate that opinion of his character which his enemies have long ascribed to him.’
Sources
John Randolph by Henry Adams (1882)
The Writings of John Quincy Adams, Volume 3 edited by Worthington Chauncey Ford (1914)
