Palaces Out Of Paragraphs

English 1102: Hamilton and Writing

Powered by Genesis

Burr v Hamilton

June 5, 2018 by Jake Smith

by Jake Smith

 

For my historical annotation project, I am annotating the Hamilton-Burr duel correspondence letters. These are a series of argumentative letters between Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr responding to a prior letter by Dr. Charles D. Cooper that was published in the Albany Register saying, “General Hamilton and Judge Kent have declared in substance that they looked upon Mr. Burr to be a dangerous man, and one who ought not be trusted with the reins of government.” Burr took exception to this and the letters he wrote in response as well as Hamilton’s responses are the letters I am annotating. Hamilton and Burr corresponded by writing each other in New York.

I was initially drawn to these documents because I wanted to learn what exactly caused Hamilton and Burr to duel and what events led up to it. Upon reading the letters, you can sense the uneasiness and frustration the two have with each other as they go back and forth. I was also drawn to the letters because being able to read two life long rivals’ personal correspondences is fascinating- you get a glimpse into their mind and what they are actually thinking. This kind of personal writing was more interesting to me than an actual publication. The importance of these letters is to establish the events that caused Hamilton and Burr to duel. It is still not fully known what specific event led to their duel, but these letters tell part of the story.

In order to fully understand the letters, I need to look at what was going on at the time they were written, more specifically the Dr. Cooper letter. I plan to use as many primary sources like the letter by Dr. Cooper in my research as they provide the best information. I have been approaching this by using the national archives website which has many letters by Hamilton and Burr and reading secondary sources explaining the tension between the two at the time. The main challenges I’ve faced so far is finding sources that reference the correspondence letters because there are not many. I plan to work around this by piecing together the events before and after these letters to get a greater understanding of the whole situation.

 

Filed Under: Blog Entry 2

Document Transcription: Hamilton-Burr Duel Correspondance

May 24, 2018 by Jake Smith

By Jake Smith

 

Document(s) chosen for project: Letters between Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr regarding their duel

Original source: Hamilton-Burr Duel Correspondance

Transcription:

N York 20 June 1804

 

Sir,

I have maturely reflected on the subject of your letter of the 18th Instant, and the more I have reflected, the more I have become convinced that I could not without manifest impropriety make the avowal or disavowal which you seem to think necessary.

The clause pointed out by Mr. Van Ness is in these terms: “I could detail to you a still more despicable opinion which General Hamilton has expressed of Mr. Burr.” To endeavor to discover the meaning of this declaration, I was obliged to seek in the antecedent part of the letter for the opinion to which it referred, as having been already disclosed. I found it in these words: “Genl. Hamilton and Judge Kent have declared in substance that they looked upon Mr. Burr to be a dangerous man, and one who ought not to be trusted with the reins of Government.” The language of Dr. Cooper plainly implies that he considered this opinion of you, which he attributes to me, as a despicable one; but he affirms that I have expressed some other still more despicable; without, however, mentioning to whom, when or where. ‘Tis evident that the phrase “still more despicable” admits of infinite shades from very light to very dark. How am I to judge of the degree intended. Or how should I annex any precise idea to language so vague?

Between Gentlemen despicable and still more despicable are not worth the pains of a distinction. When, therefore, you do not interrogate me as to the opinion which is specifically ascribed to me, I must conclude that you view it as within the limits to which the animadversions of political opponents, upon each other, may justifiably extend; and consequently as not warranting the idea of it which Dr. Cooper appears to entertain. If so, what precise inference could you draw as a guide for your future conduct, were I to acknowledge that I had expressed an opinion of you, still more despicable than the one which is particularized? How could you be sure that even this opinion had exceeded the bounds which you would yourself deem admissible between political opponents?

But I forbear further comment on the embarrassment to which the requisition you have made naturally leads. The occasion forbids a more ample illustration, though nothing would be more easy than to pursue it.

Repeating that I can not reconcile it with propriety to make the acknowledgment or denial you desire, I will add that I deem it inadmissible on principle, to consent to be interrogated as to the justness of the inferences which may be drawn by others, from whatever I may have said of a political opponent in the course of a fifteen years competition. If there were no other objection to it, this is sufficient, that it would tend to expose my sincerity and delicacy to injurious imputations from every person who may at any time have conceived that import of my expressions differently from what I may then have intended, or may afterwards recollect.

I stand ready to avow or disavow promptly and explicitly any precise or definite opinion which I may be charged with having declared to any gentleman. More than this can not fitly be expected from me; and especially it can not reasonably be expected that I shall enter into an explanation upon a basis so vague as that which you have adopted. I trust upon more reflection you will see the matter in the same light with me. If not, I can only regret the circumstances and must abide the consequences.

The publication of Dr. Cooper was never seen by me ‘till after the receipt of your letter.

 

Sir, I have the honor to be

Your Obdt.

A. Hamilton

 

[Read more…]

Filed Under: Transcription

Introduction: Jake Smith

May 22, 2018 by Jake Smith

By: Jake Smith

 

Hello, everyone. My name is Jake Smith and I am an Aerospace Engineering major here in the in-person section of the class. I am currently planning on graduating in Spring 2021. I’m spending the summer here in the ATL taking two classes, while working part time and golfing whenever I can.

 

I took English 1101 here at Tech my freshman year first semester and put off taking 1102 until the summer. Not that I didn’t enjoy my 1101 class about murder mysteries, but as an AE major, English hasn’t exactly been at the top of my list. In my experience with the WOVEN curriculum, I believe I struggle the most with written communication. I do enjoy turning in a well-written essay, however I am a slow writer so some writing assignments can be challenging for me. I hope to hone in on my writing ability this semester by brainstorming and making outlines to help the pen to paper process, as well as improving other modes of communication.

 

What do I know about Hamilton? I do know that Mike Pence was not a fan of the show, but apart from the not so surprising news of our current administration not supporting hip-hop counterculture, I am not too familiar with it or really any musicals for that matter. I do enjoy music, dance, and movies a lot, but I have not enjoyed musicals like I have other types of performance arts. Additionally, I do enjoy some hip-hop music. My quick list of the rap greats over the years: Biggie (of course), Andre 3000 & Big Boi, Nas, Dr. Dre & Snoop Dogg, Kanye, Kendrick, and recently Young Thug, Kodak Black, Money Man, and Travis Scott.

 

I look forward to this semester and here’s a collection of my favorite albums by these some of these artists:

 

Filed Under: Introductory Posts

Categories