Crime history: filling in some details Re: “Burr, Hamilton defend suspect in Manhattan murder mystery,” April 1
Besides the homicide trial acquittal of Levi Weeks on April 1, 1800, achieved by defense counsel Aaron Burr, Alexander Hamilton and Brockholst Livingston (later a U.S. Supreme Court justice), there were other instances where Burr and Hamilton worked together before they fought their 1804 duel.
They won a substantial money judgment for their client, Louis Le Guen. Burr also served on the board of New York’s anti-slavery Manumission Society, founded by Hamilton.
When Burr founded the controversial Manhattan Company (which later became Chase Manhattan Bank), he enlisted Hamilton as a sponsor. But Hamilton felt duped by Burr when he learned that the company had banking capabilities in its charter’s fine print.
It was the Manhattan Company that owned the wooden well at the bottom of which the fiancee of Levi Weeks was found, dead.
Stuart Fisk Johnson
President,
The Aaron Burr Association
Upper Marlboro
Way for Republicans to win budget impasse
Re: “Voters down on government shutdown? Maybe not,” April 1
House Republicans can end the budget impasse by passing several continuing resolutions for individual parts of the federal budget. For example, they could pass separate CRs for Social Security, Medicaid, and defense with full funding. An Environmental Protection Agency CR could subtract global warming funds.
President Obama would have to sign for the first three or they shut down. If he did not sign the EPA CR, then only EPA would get shut down.
Eric Finley
Houston
Same-sex marriage won’t lead to polygamy
Re: “Gay marriage now, harems later,” from readers, March 21
Since my letter challenging Gregory Kane’s argument that same-sex marriage will “open the door to polygamy” was published on March 3, Frederick Weaver and Lawrence Marsh have both echoed Kane’s statements about a “slippery slope.” They claim that it is inconsistent to advocate legalizing same-sex marriage but not polygamy, and that proponents of either use the same logic that their desired marriage is a civil right.
A crucial distinction between gays and polygamists, however, is that same-sex attraction is a fixed trait; in this aspect, sexual orientation is analogous to race or gender. No one can make a serious claim that those who practice polygamy are inherently attracted only to groups rather than individuals.
As conservative Andrew Sullivan said, “Anyone who can love two women can also love one of them. Homosexuals currently have no marital option at all. A demand for polygamous marriage is thus frivolous in a way that the demand for gay marriage is not.”
Thus, same-sex marriage is not a “special right” any more than allowing women the right to vote. And the slippery slope never led to children having the right to vote.
Matt Virgile
Washington
