distance from him. (Chrastina 1) Such a breach in confidence that he committed was his blunder alone.One of the statements that Hamilton made was that Burr was a man who ought not to be trusted with the reigns of the government. Considering the transgression that Burr had committed, this was hardly a libel statement. Aaron Burr was incensed at this comment, which was published in an Albany newspaper. He believed that Hamiltons comments in his character were what cost him the governor-ship for New York. Hamilton was coerced into a duel. The duel was undeniably Burrs fault. On June 18, 1804 Burr penned an epistle to Hamilton that enclosed a challenge to battle a duel. He included with the dispatch, a replica of the article enclosing the annotations. Burr demanded a prompt and unqualified acknowledgment or denial of the despicable opinion credited to Hamilton. The code for gentlemen at the time demanded that Hamilton respond to Burr if he wanted people to acknowledge his remarks. If Hamilton wanted to break away from conflict, he would have to openly testify that Burr was a gentleman, and no rogue. In an attempt to escape the duel, Hamilton declared that he had never set eyes on the piece before getting Burrs note. Aggravated, Burr wrote back to Hamilton, condemning him of artificiality and demanding a explicit answer. Hamilton, in another attempt to avoid a duel, Hamilton once again, rebuffed the demand to confer about any comments that may have been written. Quite a few more correspondences passed between the two men. Burr persisted in demanding that Hamilton either recognize or rebuff the remarks. Hamilton, not wanting conflict, gave not answer. At last, on June 27, 1804, Burr insisted that Hamilton handle the penalty of his slur. He officially confronted Hamilton to a duel to resolve their problem. To Burrs contentment, Hamilton received the challenge. Burr went as far as preparing for the duel by practicing his marksmanship eve...
