Aaron Burr 1807: A Trial of Treason Unconvicted

928 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Thomas jefferson vs. alexander hamilton dbq

The Aaron Burr Trial of 1807, commonly referred to as the Burr Conspiracy, is the setting where Aaron Burr was charged three times over with treason. Burr was not tried the first or second time he was accused, but the third time he was tried in Richmond in 1807, still he was never convicted. Aaron Burr ⎼ the defendant ⎼ was one of the founding fathers of the new nation, as well as the third Vice President of America, he is best known though for his duel with Alexander Hamilton in 1804 which ended with Hamilton’s death. The trial judge was John Marshall ⎼ Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court. Finally, the man behind the prosecution was Burr’s own President, Thomas Jefferson ⎼ founding father, author of the Declaration of Independence, …show more content…

Burr was tried separately for both charges but was found innocent on both accounts by jury verdict. Jefferson, who was clearly frustrated, brought Burr before Marshall once more to charge him for incidents that took place following those in June. Marshall was to decide if there was enough evidence for another trial and even wanted Burr to face another grand jury in the federal district court. Burr never turned up for the trial and the long ordeal ended without a single …show more content…

This would set the tone for the rest of America’s trials. Marshal believed in the judicial duty to due process and the rule of law consistently insisting Burr be tried properly. Marshall defined treason (actually levying war) narrowly and demanded constitutional proof required for conviction. This settled the meaning of levying war in the Constitution which guaranteed that future Presidents would find it difficult to use “treason” as an instrument for eliminating political

Show More
Related

  • James S. Hirsch’s Book, Hurricane

    1825 Words  | 4 Pages

    The book raises the importance of, and questions, the writ of habeas corpus. Carter used a writ of habeas corpus to get a federal trial. Many question the legality of Carter going into federal jurisdiction, when his case should have been heard before the Supreme Court of New Jersey. It was a gamble, but the federal judge gave fair justice to Carter and Artis. The State of New Jersey appealed the case all the way to the United States Supreme Court, which upheld the District Court’s ruling.

    Read More

  • Why Is Preston Justified In The Boston Trial

    612 Words  | 2 Pages

    On March 5th, 1770 in Boston, Massachusetts, a soldier rang a town bell that meant there was a fire or that police backup was needed after being approached by Boston residents who were being hostile towards him. In response to the bell being rung, British commanding officer, Thomas Preston, came to the soldier’s aid with armed British troops. Because the bell also meant “fire,” many residents flooded into the area believing a fire was occurring. A mob broke out, and the hostility of the Boston citizens rose. Objects such as ice and rocks were thrown and many citizens were armed with clubs, sticks, and other objects. At one point, an object hit a soldier, causing his gun to go off. Amidst all of the people screaming “fire,” British troops thought that Preston told them to fire.

    Read More

  • The Court Case of Marbury v. Madison and Judicial Review

    866 Words  | 2 Pages

    John Adams, the previous Federalist president, lost the Election of 1800 to Thomas Jefferson, a Democratic-Republican. Before Jefferson took office, Adams decided to appoint as many Federalists into the Supreme court as he could, including William Marbury, all of whom needed to be commissioned in order to be officially sworn in. However, Jefferson took office before the commissions could be handed out, and he ordered his Secretary of State, James Madison, to not deliver the commissions. Marbury proceeded to ask Marshall for a writ of mandamus (found in Section 13 of the Judiciary Act), forcing Madison to issue the commissions. This dispute between Marbury and Madison sparks the famous case. The dilemma here is the differences in interpretation. Some viewed Section 13 as unconstitutional, as it added power to the Judicial Branch, disrupting checks and balances. Others saw that “Marbury had been duly appointed…[and] the writ of mandamus [was] to be an appropriate legal remedy for resolving Marbury’s dilemma”(Clinton 86). Marshall wanted to issue the...

    Read More

  • Gibbons V. Ogden (1824)

    969 Words  | 2 Pages

    Historically, Marshall supported Federalism, as he had in other cases such as Marbury v. Madison (1803). This would carry the country further from a loose collection of States into a National Power to be reckoned with. Also, by putting off the slavery issue again, he extended the amount of time before there eventually would be an outbreak over the issue. He and the others knew the day would come, but they would deal with it at that later time; probably by use of arms.

    Read More

  • Lincoln's Suspension Of Habeas Corpus Analysis

    1451 Words  | 3 Pages

    Lincoln justified his action via the suspension clause, claiming that Congress was in recess and therefore could not fulfill its duty at the time. The Constitution itself specifically references habeas corpus and acknowledges that it can be suspended “in cases of rebellion,” however, as Chief Justice Roger Taney asserted in the ruling of Ex parte Merryman (1861), the writ of habeas corpus falls exclusively in the hands of Congress in Section 9 of Article 1“without the slightest reference to the executive branch.” Additionally, Article 6 provides all persons accused the “right to a speedy and public trial by impartial jury of the state.” Both provisions, Justice Taney stated, are in “language too clear to be misunderstood by anyone.” The ruling concluded by declaring that President Lincoln’s actions in suspending habeas corpus in Maryland were unconstitutional as he did so without proper congressional authorization. According to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Maryland, Lincoln had overstepped his appropriate executive authority as

    Read More

  • Founding Brothers Sparknotes

    2008 Words  | 5 Pages

    This is where Hamilton dies, but actually both of the participants were casualties because Hamilton died, but was honored by the people and the government. However, Burr lost everything such as his reputation, and his position. Major mistakes that come from Burr and Hamilton was when Burr betrayed Jefferson when he was running his second term by switching political parties Jefferson's enemy Federalists which made Hamilton to say that he's despicable. Burr is too ambitious and desperate when it comes to politics like Jefferson. Hamilton in other hand was an arrogant. He insults Burr periodically, which made Burr to lose his position and reputation by publicly. In conclusion, by starting with a violent clash between Hamilton and Burr, establishes that the stakes for which these men had learned to debate one another. The end of this chapter did end in violent death, but the reader now understands that the author views these relationships as fiery and passionate although they were flawed by destroying their friendship, lives, and careers by insulting, killing, debating, and betraying one another, but they all failed to achieve their full aspirations due to their flawed

    Read More

  • The Influence Of Thomas Jefferson's Louisiana Purchase

    1033 Words  | 3 Pages

    Madison as he was in the Louisiana Purchase, he was still a key player in this episode that redefined the Judiciary branch of American government. Jefferson had just taken over the presidency from John Adams, a member of the rival Federalist Party, who, during his last days in office, had many of his fellow Federalists assigned offices in the Judiciary, including the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Marshall (Goldfield 277). Jefferson and his Secretary of State, James Madison, resented this Federalist grab for power and refused to give one of the appointees his position. This appointee, William Marbury, used the Judiciary Act of 1789 to take the issue to court (277). However Marshall, did not rule that Marbury be given his appointment by Jefferson, who had been actively removing Federalist Judges and would likely choose not to acknowledge Marshall’s authority (277). Marshall took a different approach, instead of giving Marbury his appointment, he declared the Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional because it gave the Supreme Court authority that was beyond what was outlined in the Constitution (277). By taking away some of his own authority, Marshall gave the Supreme Court the formidable ability to declare laws unconstitutional (277). Interestingly, it would never have happened if Jefferson and his administration had not have taken action (or in this case lack of action) against the appointment

    Read More

  • Racial Injustice in the Book A Lesson Before Dying by Ernest J. Gaines

    522 Words  | 2 Pages

    For Jefferson, racial injustice is present in court. Because of the color of his skin, Jefferson was automatically found guilty by those 12 men. “12 white men say a black man must die, and another white man sets the date and time without consulting one black person, Justice?” (157) The jury that decided his sentence was made up of 12 white men. Jefferson’s trial was unfair because the verdict was made by all white men. Jefferson was really just at the wrong place at the wrong time, but the biased jury saw him as guilty before finding any real evidence. This scene from court is an example of how Jefferson is treated unfairly because of the way he is viewed by others.

    Read More

  • Exploring Treason: The Aaron Burr Trial Impact

    1020 Words  | 3 Pages

    It must be strict so that the president or, in the original case, the monarch cannot abuse their power and silence those who are against his/her leadership. Because Burr’s action of creating an army were only alleged, he was not on the island with the charge of treason was given, and possibly because Jefferson had a vendetta against Burr, he could not be convicted for levying war.

    Read More

  • Henry Clay: The Great Compromiser of America

    1459 Words  | 3 Pages

    It was a dark time in the history of the United States. A crisis was shadowing the country and had locked the North and the South at each other’s throats. Tensions were escalating and civil war seemed imminent. One brave man stood up to the challenge of resolving the conflict – Congressman Henry Clay of Kentucky. Despite his old age and illness, he managed to develop a set of compromise measures and convinced both sides to agree to it. This compromise, the Compromise of 1850, may have held off the Civil War for a decade, giving the North ample time to prepare (Remini). But, it wasn’t the only compromise Clay played a part in. Clay is well-known for developing the Missouri Compromise of 1820 and the Compromise Tariff of 1833, as well as the aforementioned Compromise of 1850. These compromises earned Clay the name of the “Great Compromiser” (Van Deusen), and saved the Union from falling into discord.

    Read More

  • Thomas Jefferson And The Civil War

    909 Words  | 2 Pages

    Thomas Jefferson was born on April 13,1743 in Shadwell, Virginia. He was born into a family that had status, wealth, and tradition of public service. Jefferson was the third child in the family and grew up with six sisters and one brother. Thomas Jefferson was well educated; he attended private schools and at the age of seventeen he attended the College of William and Mary. Thomas Jefferson was interested in being a scientist, after learning that there was no opportunity for a career in science in Virginia he then studied law. In 1767, Thomas Jefferson was admitted to the bar in 1769, when Jefferson public career started he already owned more than twenty-five hundred acres that he inherited from his father who died in 1757. After marring his wife Martha Wayles Skelton whom was a young widow his property doubled. After the death of Martha’s parents, his property doubled again.

    Read More

  • The Burr Conspiracy

    954 Words  | 2 Pages

    Aaron Burr was born in Newark New Jersey on February 6, 1756, and Burr was educated at what is now Princeton University. Burr joined the Continental Army in 1775, and rose to the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. Burr was appointed attorney general of New York in 1789 and served as a United States senator from 1791 to 1797 (Onager CD-ROM). In the Election of 1800, Aaron Burr was the running mate of Republican candidate Thomas Jefferson. Although Burr was running for vice-president, he received as many votes as Jefferson did, and the House of Representatives chose Jefferson as president. After Burr’s term as vice-president was over and he lost the race for the governorship of New York, Burr fought Alexander Hamilton in a duel in Weekawhen, New Jersey, on July 11,1804. Aaron Burr killed his political rival, Alexander Hamilton, and his credibility as a politician in that duel. Shortly after the duel, Aaron Burr became involved in a plot known as the Burr Conspiracy. After the scheme was discovered by Thomas Jefferson, Aaron Burr was arrested for treason. Burr was acquitted after a six-month trial on September 1, 1807.

    Read More

  • Aaron Burr

    1186 Words  | 3 Pages

    There is has been much speculation as to who murdered President Thomas Jefferson in March of 1809. It is apparent that Aaron Burr had reasons for wanting the President dead. They had become enemies during their race for the presidency and remained on unfriendly terms throughout their time serving together as President and Vice President. When running for re-election, Jefferson dropped Burr from his ticket creating an even wider rift between them. Burr was known for his violent nature, having killed Alexander Hamilton during a duel, which they had entered into as a means of settling a dispute. It is also believed that Burr had intended to overthrow the United States government by carrying out an elaborate scheme involving the creation of a Latin American empire. Jefferson issued a warrant for his arrest after being informed of the plan. Thus adding to Burr's motives for wanting to murder him.

    Read More

  • Thomas Jefferson's Presidency

    1137 Words  | 3 Pages

    When Jefferson came into office, he planned to institute the policies of the Democratic-Republicans in domestic affairs. The judicial system had gained a lot of power through the Federalists which forced Jefferson to attempt to shrink their influence. He ultimately prevailed, and even reduce...

    Read More

  • Abraham Lincoln's Abuse of Power

    741 Words  | 2 Pages

    The most blatant abuse of Lincoln's power was his suspension of habeas corpus. The suspension of this constitutional guarantee, by which a person could not be imprisoned indefinitely without being charges with some specific crime, around much opposition throughout the country. Although Lincoln himself made no concentrated efforts to suppress political oppositions, the repeal of habeas corpus enabled overzealous civil and military authorities to imprison thousands of people who were vocal in their opposition to the war against the South. During the war, in the case Ex parte Merryman, Chief Justice Taney ordered Lincoln to grant a writ of habeas corpus to a Southern agitator who had been arbitrarily jailed by military authorities in Maryland. Lincoln ignored the order. After the war, in the case Ex parte Milligan, the Supreme Court ruled that president could not suspend habeas corpus without the consent of Congress.

    Read More

More about Aaron Burr 1807: A Trial of Treason Unconvicted

Open Document