
Betrayal, Treason, and the Fall of an American Founder
Alexander Hamilton was dead and buried, killed by a gun fired by Aaron Burr. At the height of his political power, Burr had killed Hamilton, and, much like Hamilton on the day he was shot, July 11, 1804, Burr's political life would enter its death throes on July 12—the day Hamilton died.
Burr had witnessed a steady rise politically, from joining the Continental Army during the Revolutionary War to becoming attorney general for New York, then serving as a senator from 1791 to 1797. He was one vote shy of winning the 1800 presidential election and, therefore, had to settle for the vice presidency under Thomas Jefferson. Burr, however, had spurned too many political foes and allies alike, and, after the duel with Hamilton, his rise had come to an end.
Anonymous 1902 illustration depicting the duel between Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton, which occurred on July 11, 1804.
Public Domain
After Hamilton's death, both New York and New Jersey indicted him for murder, though he never stood trial. Burr returned to Washington to finish out his term as vice president and president of the Senate. The latter proved monumental, as he oversaw the impeachment trial of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase, which had been instigated by Jefferson. The Senate acquitted Chase on March 1, 1805.
The following day, Burr stood before the Senate and announced his resignation to the Senate. He had been replaced by George Clinton, of New York, for vice president during the 1804 election. His party, the Democratic-Republicans, had seen the writing on the wall. Burr's resignation came two days before Jefferson began his second term. Burr proclaimed that the Senate
'is a sanctuary; a citadel of law, of order, and of liberty; and it is here—it is here, in this exalted refuge; here, if anywhere, will resistance be made to the storms of political phrenzy and the silent arts of corruption; and if the Constitution be destined ever to perish by the sacrilegious hands of the demagogue or the usurper, which God avert, its expiring agonies will be witnessed on this floor.'
It appears Burr was referencing Jefferson (and even perhaps his long-time and now-dead political rival, Hamilton, who had held immense sway over the Federalist Party). His words, however, would soon deal specifically with himself, and he would be standing in court accused of being 'the usurper.' But the Constitution, with its definition of treason, ensured he did not prematurely join Hamilton in the grave.
Go West
Burr's political life in the East was over, and he now looked to the new lands in the West. On April 30, 1803, the Louisiana Purchase was signed, practically doubling the size of the United States. This new territory seemed ripe for political leaders, and Burr, known for his ambition, pursued the opportunity.
Related Stories
7/15/2024
3/19/2025
Before the Louisiana Purchase, the territory had switched hands between the Spanish and French. Even after the Franco-Spanish
James Wilkinson, a morally ambiguous American figure, had served in the Continental Army, been part of the Conway Cabal against Gen. George Washington, and by 1784 had moved to Kentucky and began negotiations with the Spanish regarding independence for Kentucky. The threat of settlers turning territories into new nations was a constant worry for the American government. In 1787, Wilkinson had secretly sworn allegiance to the Spanish governor (a fact not officially uncovered until the 20th century), and his penchant for split loyalties became pronounced in his dealings with Burr.
Putting a Plan in Place
After his time in the nation's capital ended, Burr was confronted with the dichotomy between opportunity and loyalty. He chose the former—a seemingly natural inclination for Burr. During the same month as his resignation, he met with Anthony Merry, the British minister to the United States.
A plan, however, was being formed. He had suggested to Merry that he would require several frigates at the mouth of the Mississippi River to prevent an American blockade, as well as a loan of about 100,000 pounds.
Burr then left Philadelphia to inspect the western lands. He arrived in Pittsburgh at the end of April, planning to meet his old friend, Wilkinson. The meeting had to wait as Wilkinson, currently serving as the territorial governor of Louisiana, was delayed. Burr, therefore, boarded a 60-foot houseboat and made his way down the Ohio River.
On May 5, 1805, he stopped at the four-mile long Blennerhassett Island, where he dined with the wealthy Irish immigrant, Harman Blennerhassett, and his family. He remained at the island mansion until 11 p.m., discussing his plans. These plans involved Blennerhassett turning his mansion into Burr's military headquarters. Blennerhassett
Blennerhassett Island from the north, as seen today.
Burr continued down the Ohio River, stopping in Cincinnati and Nashville before arriving at Fort Massac, located on the river at the southern tip of Illinois today. Here, he met Wilkinson, whom he had been communicating with via coded letters based on a cipher system Wilkinson had created.
Along with a barge, Wilkinson provided Burr a letter of introduction for his arrival in New Orleans. Upon entering in the port city, Burr made the acquaintance of a wealthy merchant, Daniel Clark, who, on Burr's behalf, began inquiring about the strength of local Spanish forts and the public sentiment toward a Mexican irruption from Spain. He also promised $50,000 towards Burr's imperial expedition with the hopes of becoming 'a duke' in the new Burr empire.
For the rest of 1805, Burr continued his survey of the western lands, furthering discussions with Wilkinson, making more contacts, even returning to Washington to dine with Jefferson. He wrote his first letter to Blennerhassett, ordering him to turn his island into a military encampment. As 1805 turned into 1806, and the winter months gave way to spring, Burr continued the pursuit of his ambitious expedition, even taking the major step of contracting more than 20 boats to be built to accommodate 500 men, along with supplies. He also purchased 400,000 acres near the Washita River in today's northern Texas.
The Unraveling
In August 1806, however, his idea began to unravel when he discussed his goals with Col. George Morgan. Morgan, completely shocked by Burr's comments, sent a letter to Jefferson, informing him of Burr's plans—it was the first Jefferson had heard of the plan.
When Wilkinson received Burr's latest correspondence about his impending arrival with armed men, he suddenly soured on Burr's plans and sent a letter of warning to Jefferson. He informed the president that an expedition planned to sail from New Orleans in February and land at Vera Cruz.
The federal government had worked long and hard to resume peaceful relations with Spain. Jefferson, concerned that would be undone by this seemingly imminent invasion,
Most of the boats built for the invasion were confiscated shortly before their departure. Many of the armed men who planned to be involved now either dispersed or were too disappointed in the recent outcomes to continue. Burr, arriving with Blennerhassett and a remnant of his confederates in Bayou Pierre, just north of New Orleans, discovered Wilkinson's betrayal. Burr immediately issued a statement of innocence, but that hardly mattered.
While camping along the Natchez River, Burr received a letter from the governor of the Mississippi Territory requiring he surrender and stand before a grand jury. He arrived in Washington, a town in the Mississippi Territory, and stood before a grand jury, which quickly acquitted him. Burr was subsequently released.
A Case of Treason
As more rumors and facts about Burr's actions circulated, another warrant for his arrest was issued. Burr planned to take refuge in Florida, but while in Alabama, he was arrested and taken by a nine-man military escort to Richmond. On March 26, he stood before Chief Justice John Marshall, now known as the Father of the Supreme Court.
A photo from 1904 shows the place Burr was captured near Wakefield, Ala.
Burr's bail was set for $10,000, which was paid by several locals, thus freeing Burr from custody. It was during this week in history, on May 22, 1807, that Burr was brought before the grand jury for the charge of treason. The trial itself, however, did not begin until Aug. 3, primarily due to waiting for one of the trial's primary witnesses: James Wilkinson.
When the trial began, Marshall made it abundantly clear that the charge of treason must adhere strictly to the Constitution's
Chief Justice John Marshall, oil on canvas painting by Rembrandt Peale, 1834.
Public Domain
The case became one of America's most famous, involving some of the nation's most famous, infamous, and important figures, including Burr; Marshall; Wilkinson; co-conspirator Jonathan Dayton, who was the youngest signer of the Constitution; Burr's defense council, which included Edmund Randolph, a former secretary of state and a delegate at the Constitutional Convention and Charles Lee, a former attorney general; the prosecution, which included the future attorney general, William Wirt; and, to an extent, Jefferson, who had unprecedentedly been sent a subpoena by Marshall for papers concerning the case.
On Sept, 1, 1807, the jury concluded that 'Aaron Burr is not proved to be guilty under this indictment by any evidence submitted to us. We therefore find him not guilty.'
Whether Burr committed treason by attempting to create another country on the continent, or if he solely planned an ill-conceived invasion of Mexican lands remains a topic of debate to this day.
Never miss a This Week in History story! Sign up for the American History newsletter
What arts and culture topics would you like us to cover? Please email ideas or feedback to
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Business of Fashion
33 minutes ago
- Business of Fashion
Why Brands Are Still Betting on the US
Serena Uziyel isn't giving up on the US. Over the last year, the Istanbul-based luxury shoe brand has opened two stores in Florida and one in New York in what is now its second-largest market after Turkey. The brand hopes to open more stores in Florida, as well as new markets like California and Texas. Those plans were made before the Trump administration unleashed its tariffs, and when the US economy was on more solid footing. But the brand has no intention of changing course now. 'We know how to deal with it, so we are not going to change our plans,' said chief executive Nadir Celik. It helps that the brand has experience navigating economic turbulence and high inflation in Turkey, he added. Countless brands are making their own assessment of whether trying for a slice of the world's biggest fashion market is still worth the investment. All signs point to a weak economy with consumer confidence plummeting as the costs for essential goods like eggs go up. Retail sales on discretionary items fell in April. Trump's trade policy is also in flux, with the Supreme Court potentially weighing in on whether he can impose tariffs on dozens of countries on top of a 10 percent global levy that went into effect in April. Investing in America could be a costly mistake in a worst case scenario, where Trump imposes prohibitive tariffs, the economy enters a deep recession, or both. But missing out if the turbulence is milder than expected has its own costs. Brands operating in the US are moving quickly to protect themselves, such as by reconfiguring their supply chains to minimise potential tariffs, or operating on parallel tracks, growing their US presence while speeding up expansion elsewhere. For many, the choice to stay is clear – the market is simply too big to ignore. 'America as an economy is too important to be canceled,' said the Switzerland-based designer Philipp Plein. 'People have money to spend; people will keep on spending money.' A Resilient Market Philipp Plein International Group is going ahead with a number of US store openings for its Plein Sport activewear brand, as it looks to at least double sales for that business to $40 million, Plein said. The line is made in China, where Trump has slapped 30 percent duties on all products, but he's betting that the tariff uproar won't be as detrimental as many fear. He's even more confident in the American consumer. He noted the country's economy bounced back quickly after Covid compared to other leading economies like China, which has struggled to recover from the pandemic. Brands are also banking on customer loyalty to get them through a potential rough patch. When it comes to customers, 'once we get, them we keep them,' said Peta Heinsen, co-founder and director of the Australian womenswear brand Matteau. Heinsen said the label aims to have more than half its sales come from the US, up from 35 percent today. If US customers replicate a 70 percent global repeat purchase rate, they'll get there, tariffs or no tariffs, Heinsen said. The more that happens in the US, 'we can see huge potential without having to do too much more than we're already doing,' she said. Supply Chain Alignment Where brands are changing course, it's often behind the scenes. Ever-changing tariffs have underscored the need for brands to have a global supply chain — particularly one that isn't wholly dependent on China. The more suppliers and factories in its network, the more flexible a brand can be in relocating production when the cost of doing business increases. Diversified supply chains will help in most tariff scenarios, experts say. Several brand founders cited Portugal, Turkey and India as countries with relatively low manufacturing costs that were likely to dodge the highest tariffs. In February, Matteau moved production of its swimwear line from China to Portugal, sidestepping the roller coaster ride in April and May that saw tariffs on Chinese imports set as high as 145 percent before temporarily settling at their current level. (Whether the brand's bet pays off in the long run remains to be seen; in late May, Trump threatened a 50 percent tariff on goods from the European Union). After moving into 1,700 Target stores, supplement maker Imaraïs Beauty is in talks to move production of its gummy supplements from Canada to the US so it can keep its big new retail customer consistently supplied without having to pay tariffs. 'As a brand, and a brand owner, you're putting out fires nonstop,' said co-founder and chief executive Aaron Hefter. 'This is a forest fire.' With a trade war still brewing and consumer sentiment in flux, brands have to move forward with their growth plans while minimising any threats to their business, said Anshuman Jaiswal, chief business officer at software firm OnePint, which helps global businesses manage inventory. 'The only thing that you can control is, 'Can I have more risk cushion in my business plan?'' Jaiswal said.


Hamilton Spectator
an hour ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Mexico's ruling party headed toward control of newly elected Supreme Court, vote tallies show
MEXICO CITY (AP) — Mexico's ruling Morena party appeared to be heading toward control over the Supreme Court, preliminary vote tallies of the country's first judicial election indicated. While votes were still being counted for the majority of the 2,600 federal, state and local judge positions up for grabs in Sunday's judicial elections, results rolled in for the nine Supreme Court positions. The majority of the newly elected justices share strong ties and ideological alignments with the ruling party, shifting a once fairly balanced high court into the hands of the very party that overhauled the judicial system to elect judges for the first time. Experts warned the shift would undercut checks and balances in the Latin American nation: The governing party would now be close to controlling all three branches of government, and President Claudia Sheinbaum and her party also would have a easier path to push through their agenda. 'We're watching as power is falling almost entirely into the hands of one party,' said Georgina De la Fuente, election specialist with the Mexican consulting firm Strategia Electoral. 'There isn't any balance of power.' A Morena-leaning court and an Indigenous justice Some of those headed toward election were members or former members of the party. A number of them, who were Supreme Court justices prior to the election, were appointed by former President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, Sheinbaum's mentor who pushed through the judicial overhaul last year. Others were advisers to the president or the party or campaigned with politically aligned visions for the judiciary. Not all of the prospective winners were explicitly aligned with Morena. One standout was Hugo Aguilar Ortiz, an Indigenous lawyer from the southern state of Oaxaca. He has no clear party affiliation, though Sheinbaum said repeatedly she hoped to have an Indigenous judge on the court. A political controversy That Morena would emerge from the election with control of the judiciary was what critics had feared . The vote came after months of fierce debate, prompted when López Obrador and the party jammed through the reforms for judges to be elected instead of being appointed based on merits. The overhaul will notably limit the Supreme Court as a counterweight to the president. Critics say the judicial reform was an attempt to take advantage of high popularity levels to stack courts in favor of the party. Sheinbaum and her mentor have insisted that electing judges will root out corruption in a system most Mexicans agree is broken. 'Whoever says that there is authoritarianism in Mexico is lying,' Sheinbaum said during the vote. 'Mexico is a country that is only becoming more free, just and democratic because that is the will of the people.' The elections were marred by low participation — about 13% — and confusion by voters who struggled to understand the new voting system, something opponents quickly latched onto as a failure. De la Fuente said Morena is likely to use its new lack of counterweight in the high court to push through rounds of reforms, including electoral changes. Late Monday, more than 85% of the ballots had been tallied and counting was to continue overnight. The leading Supreme Court candidates — Hugo Aguilar Ortiz was the big surprise from the election. The Indigenous lawyer led all vote-getters, including several sitting Supreme Court justices. He's known as a legal activist fighting for the rights of Indigenous Mexicans and has criticized corruption in the judiciary. — Lenia Batres was already a Supreme Court justice and was appointed by López Obrador. Previously a congresswoman, she's a member of Morena and clearly an ally of Mexico's president. — Yasmín Esquivel is a Supreme Court justice who was appointed by López Obrador. She focused her campaign on modernizing the justice system and has pushed for gender equality. She was at the center of a 2022 controversy when she was accused of plagiarizing her thesis. She is considered an ally of the Morena party. — Loretta Ortiz is a justice on the Supreme Court who was appointed by López Obrador. She also served in Congress and resigned from Morena in 2018 in a show of independence as a judge. Despite that, she's considered an ally of the party. — María Estela Ríos González is a lawyer who acted as legal adviser to López Obrador, first when he was mayor of Mexico City and later when he became president. She has a long history as a public servant and work in labor law and on a number of Indigenous issues. — Giovanni Figueroa Mejía is a lawyer from the Pacific coast state of Nayarit with a doctorate in constitutional law. He currently works as an academic at the Iberoamericana University in Mexico City. He's worked in human rights. While he holds no clear party affiliation, he supported the judicial overhaul pushed forward by Morena, saying in an interview with his university that the overhaul 'was urgent and necessary in order to rebuild' the judiciary. He said some of his work in constitutional law was cited in justifying the reform. — Irving Espinosa Betanzo is a magistrate on Mexico City's Supreme Court and has previously worked as a congressional adviser to Morena. He campaigned for the country's highest court on a platform of eliminating nepotism and corruption and pushing for human rights. — Arístides Rodrigo Guerrero García is a law professor pushing for social welfare with no experience as a judge, but who has worked as a public servant and has experience in both constitutional and parliamentary law. He gained traction in campaigns for a social media video of him claiming he's 'more prepared than a pork rind.' — Sara Irene Herrerías Guerra is a prosecutor specializing in human rights for Mexico's Attorney General's Office. She's worked on issues like gender equality, sexually transmitted infections and human trafficking. In 2023, she worked on the investigation of a fire in an immigration facility in the border city of Ciudad Juárez that killed 40 migrants. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .


The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Mexico's ruling party headed toward control of newly elected Supreme Court, vote tallies show
MEXICO CITY (AP) — Mexico's ruling Morena party appeared to be heading toward control over the Supreme Court, preliminary vote tallies of the country's first judicial election indicated. While votes were still being counted for the majority of the 2,600 federal, state and local judge positions up for grabs in Sunday's judicial elections, results rolled in for the nine Supreme Court positions. The majority of the newly elected justices share strong ties and ideological alignments with the ruling party, shifting a once fairly balanced high court into the hands of the very party that overhauled the judicial system to elect judges for the first time. Experts warned the shift would undercut checks and balances in the Latin American nation: The governing party would now be close to controlling all three branches of government, and President Claudia Sheinbaum and her party also would have a easier path to push through their agenda. 'We're watching as power is falling almost entirely into the hands of one party,' said Georgina De la Fuente, election specialist with the Mexican consulting firm Strategia Electoral. 'There isn't any balance of power.' Some of those headed toward election were members or former members of the party. A number of them, who were Supreme Court justices prior to the election, were appointed by former President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, Sheinbaum's mentor who pushed through the judicial overhaul last year. Others were advisers to the president or the party or campaigned with politically aligned visions for the judiciary. Not all of the prospective winners were explicitly aligned with Morena. One standout was Hugo Aguilar Ortiz, an Indigenous lawyer from the southern state of Oaxaca. He has no clear party affiliation, though Sheinbaum said repeatedly she hoped to have an Indigenous judge on the court. That Morena would emerge from the election with control of the judiciary was what critics had feared. The vote came after months of fierce debate, prompted when López Obrador and the party jammed through the reforms for judges to be elected instead of being appointed based on merits. The overhaul will notably limit the Supreme Court as a counterweight to the president. Critics say the judicial reform was an attempt to take advantage of high popularity levels to stack courts in favor of the party. Sheinbaum and her mentor have insisted that electing judges will root out corruption in a system most Mexicans agree is broken. 'Whoever says that there is authoritarianism in Mexico is lying,' Sheinbaum said during the vote. 'Mexico is a country that is only becoming more free, just and democratic because that is the will of the people.' The elections were marred by low participation — about 13% — and confusion by voters who struggled to understand the new voting system, something opponents quickly latched onto as a failure. De la Fuente said Morena is likely to use its new lack of counterweight in the high court to push through rounds of reforms, including electoral changes. Late Monday, more than 85% of the ballots had been tallied and counting was to continue overnight. — Hugo Aguilar Ortiz was the big surprise from the election. The Indigenous lawyer led all vote-getters, including several sitting Supreme Court justices. He's known as a legal activist fighting for the rights of Indigenous Mexicans and has criticized corruption in the judiciary. — Lenia Batres was already a Supreme Court justice and was appointed by López Obrador. Previously a congresswoman, she's a member of Morena and clearly an ally of Mexico's president. — Yasmín Esquivel is a Supreme Court justice who was appointed by López Obrador. She focused her campaign on modernizing the justice system and has pushed for gender equality. She was at the center of a 2022 controversy when she was accused of plagiarizing her thesis. She is considered an ally of the Morena party. — Loretta Ortiz is a justice on the Supreme Court who was appointed by López Obrador. She also served in Congress and resigned from Morena in 2018 in a show of independence as a judge. Despite that, she's considered an ally of the party. — María Estela Ríos González is a lawyer who acted as legal adviser to López Obrador, first when he was mayor of Mexico City and later when he became president. She has a long history as a public servant and work in labor law and on a number of Indigenous issues. — Giovanni Figueroa Mejía is a lawyer from the Pacific coast state of Nayarit with a doctorate in constitutional law. He currently works as an academic at the Iberoamericana University in Mexico City. He's worked in human rights. While he holds no clear party affiliation, he supported the judicial overhaul pushed forward by Morena, saying in an interview with his university that the overhaul 'was urgent and necessary in order to rebuild' the judiciary. He said some of his work in constitutional law was cited in justifying the reform. — Irving Espinosa Betanzo is a magistrate on Mexico City's Supreme Court and has previously worked as a congressional adviser to Morena. He campaigned for the country's highest court on a platform of eliminating nepotism and corruption and pushing for human rights. — Arístides Rodrigo Guerrero García is a law professor pushing for social welfare with no experience as a judge, but who has worked as a public servant and has experience in both constitutional and parliamentary law. He gained traction in campaigns for a social media video of him claiming he's 'more prepared than a pork rind.' — Sara Irene Herrerías Guerra is a prosecutor specializing in human rights for Mexico's Attorney General's Office. She's worked on issues like gender equality, sexually transmitted infections and human trafficking. In 2023, she worked on the investigation of a fire in an immigration facility in the border city of Ciudad Juárez that killed 40 migrants.