It's taken for granted today that the Supreme Court has final say on how the Constitution is interpreted, but this principle--hotly debated in the republic's early years -- was established by John Marshall (1755-1835), the fourth Chief Justice. Historian Smith's definitive biography, detailed and lucid, is a model of scholarly writing for the general public. The author claims our admiration for the justice and sparks affection for the man: warm, gregarious, fond of drink, a Federalist with the common touch, a seasoned political infighter who remained on good terms with his opponents.


From Publishers Weekly
The most famous chief justice of the U. S. has been dead for 161 years, but his life and work continue to fascinate legal scholars, political scientists and biographers. Smith, a University of Toronto political scientist, is the most recent devotee. His endnotes and bibliography mention at least a dozen previous books about Marshall. It would be helpful to the lay reader if Smith explained why he believed another book, especially such a massive one, was needed. Like the recently published The Great Chief Justice: John Marshall and the Rule of Law by Charles F. Hobson (Forecasts, July 29), Smith's version of the life is both respectful and a revision of the revisionism. He acknowledges his debt to Hobson, editor of the Marshall papers, just as Hobson alerted readers to Smith's upcoming tome. While Hobson focused on Marshall's mind, Smith focuses on the externals of Marshall's life. This is essentially a chronological account of a life lived fully. There are few flourishes?for example, Marshall's death is handled matter-of-factly in two pages. The 151 pages of endnotes are frequently livelier, more interpretive and more informative than the matching portions of the text. The pedestrian nature of the text stems mainly from Smith's decision to let Marshall speak for himself. The biography is almost devoid of interpretation and speculation. Sound scholarship, yes; lively lifetelling, only occasionally. Copyright 1996 Reed Business Information, Inc.


From Library Journal
The U.S. Supreme Court has the power and the obligation to reassess any lower court decision where a substantial issue of public law is involved. Yet this power of judicial review was not granted to the Court in the Constitution but asserted by Chief Justice John Marshall in an 1803 decision. This was only one landmark opinion in a remarkable 35-year tenure as chief justice. Smith (political science, Univ. of Toronto) helps us to understand Marshall's real accomplishments in defining and shaping the form of our modern constitutional system. Like Charles Hobson's The Great Chief Justice (LJ 9/15/96), she interprets John Marshall's impact on our federal system. But as a political scientist Smith looks more at Marshall and the Court as an institution with power. Hobson as a historian and editor is more concerned with Marshall's written record. Still, both books highlight Marshall's accomplishments in defining the scope of the Court and its real powers. Scholars and informed lay readers will want to compare both interpretations, which are highly recommended for academic, law, and larger public libraries.?Jerry E. Stephens, U.S. Court of Appeals Lib., Oklahoma CityCopyright 1996 Reed Business Information, Inc.


Joseph J. Ellis, The New York Times Book Review
A wholly satisfying modern biography that immediately establishes itself as the authoritative life.


The New York Times Book Review, Joseph J. Ellis
A wholly satisfying modern biography that immediately establishes itself as the authoritative life ... Mr. Smith's splendid biography deserves large readership mostly because it has recovered Marshall the man.


Jack N. Rakove, The Boston Globe
Smith's well-written biography brings Marshall's achievement alive. A New York Times Notable Book of 1996


From Booklist
Smith has painted an extraordinarily detailed and robust portrait of the most significant and influential jurist in U.S. history. Appointed chief justice of the Supreme Court in 1801, John Marshall, farmer, soldier, lawyer, diplomatic envoy, and politician, served as the nation's premier legal authority and moral barometer for 35 years. During his lengthy and brilliant tenure as chief justice, Marshall was almost single-handedly responsible for asserting and solidifying the ultimate power of the Court, defining and strengthening the Constitution, designing a legal climate sympathetic to the growth of the U.S. economy, and promoting the Federalist concept of a strong, centralized national government. In addition, the author does not neglect to convey the essential humanity of her renowned and respected subject. Marshall is characterized as a genuinely warm and humorous intellectual giant, a gifted leader with an infectious personality and the common touch. A comprehensive and definitive biography of a judicial giant. Margaret Flanagan


Review
“A wholly satisfying modern biography that immediately establishes itself as the authoritative life.”—Joseph J. Ellis, The New York Times Book Review

“We are in Smith’s debt for a richer, more accurate and more balanced view of Marshall and his achievements than we have ever had before....The best single-volume biography of the Chief Justice that we have.”—Gordon S. Wood, The New Republic



Review
“A wholly satisfying modern biography that immediately establishes itself as the authoritative life.”—Joseph J. Ellis, The New York Times Book Review

“We are in Smith’s debt for a richer, more accurate and more balanced view of Marshall and his achievements than we have ever had before....The best single-volume biography of the Chief Justice that we have.”—Gordon S. Wood, The New Republic



Dennis Hutchinson, Chicago Tribune
Any reader who wishes to watch Marshall work in context can ask for no better source.


Gordon S. Wood, The New Republic
A richer, more accurate and more balanced view of Marshall and his achievements than we have ever had.


Review
“A wholly satisfying modern biography that immediately establishes itself as the authoritative life.”—Joseph J. Ellis, The New York Times Book Review

“We are in Smith’s debt for a richer, more accurate and more balanced view of Marshall and his achievements than we have ever had before....The best single-volume biography of the Chief Justice that we have.”—Gordon S. Wood, The New Republic



Book Description
A New York Times Notable Book of 1996

It was in tolling the death of Chief Justice John Marshall in 1835 that the Liberty Bell cracked, never to ring again. An apt symbol of the man who shaped both court and country, whose life “reads like an early history of the United States,” as the Wall Street Journal noted, adding: Jean Edward Smith “does an excellent job of recounting the details of Marshall’s life without missing the dramatic sweep of the history it encompassed.”

Working from primary sources, Jean Edward Smith has drawn an elegant portrait of a remarkable man. Lawyer, jurist, scholars; soldier, comrade, friend; and, most especially, lover of fine Madeira, good food, and animated table talk: the Marshall who emerges from these pages is noteworthy for his very human qualities as for his piercing intellect, and, perhaps most extraordinary, for his talents as a leader of men and a molder of consensus. A man of many parts, a true son of the Enlightenment, John Marshall did much for his country, and John Marshall: Definer of a Nation demonstrates this on every page.



About the Author
Jean Edward Smith is professor of political science at the University of Toronto. Among his books are Lucius D. Clay: An American Life, and George Bush's War. He divides his time between Toronto, Mississippi, and New York.

FROM THE PUBLISHER

When, in 1801, John Marshall became Chief Justice of the United States, the Supreme Court was little more than a clause in the Constitution and a gaggle of conflicting opinions. For the next thirty-five years, Marshall was to mold the Court into a major force. Under his leadership, it learned to speak with one voice, becoming a powerful and respected third branch of government. It enunciated the principle of judicial review, established itself as the arbiter of constitutional authority, and affirmed the Constitution as an instrument of the people, not of the states. As a result, the implied powers of the federal government took on definition, the workings of the national government gained authority, and the economic system was made viable through a sophisticated understanding of the commerce clause. In truth, if George Washington founded the nation, John Marshall defined it. But who was this son of yeoman Virginia stock, this soldier who endured the terrible suffering at Valley Forge, this lawyer who was a moving force behind Virginia's ratification of the Constitution, this diplomat who outwitted Talleyrand and thereby raised the profile of a raw young country in the capitals of Europe? Confidant of presidents, friend to the founding fathers, statesman, envoy, and legislator: who was this man who gave up a flourishing legal practice to take on the thankless task of shaping the Court and went on to make it into the institution we see today? Working from primary sources, Jean Edward Smith draws an elegant portrait of this remarkable man. Lawyer, jurist, scholar; soldier, comrade, friend; and, most especially, lover of fine Madeira, good food, and animated table talk: the Marshall who emerges from this book is as noteworthy for his very human qualities as for his piercing intellect, and perhaps most extraordinary for his talents as a leader of men and a molder of consensus.

SYNOPSIS

It was in tolling the death of Chief Justice John Marshall in 1835 that the Liberty Bell cracked, never to ring again. It is an apt symbol of the man who shaped both court and country, a life examined in this detailed biography.

FROM THE CRITICS

Publishers Weekly

The most famous chief justice of the U. S. has been dead for 161 years, but his life and work continue to fascinate legal scholars, political scientists and biographers. Smith, a University of Toronto political scientist, is the most recent devotee. His endnotes and bibliography mention at least a dozen previous books about Marshall. It would be helpful to the lay reader if Smith explained why he believed another book, especially such a massive one, was needed. Like the recently published The Great Chief Justice: John Marshall and the Rule of Law by Charles F. Hobson (Forecasts, July 29), Smith's version of the life is both respectful and a revision of the revisionism. He acknowledges his debt to Hobson, editor of the Marshall papers, just as Hobson alerted readers to Smith's upcoming tome. While Hobson focused on Marshall's mind, Smith focuses on the externals of Marshall's life. This is essentially a chronological account of a life lived fully. There are few flourishesfor example, Marshall's death is handled matter-of-factly in two pages. The 151 pages of endnotes are frequently livelier, more interpretive and more informative than the matching portions of the text. The pedestrian nature of the text stems mainly from Smith's decision to let Marshall speak for himself. The biography is almost devoid of interpretation and speculation. Sound scholarship, yes; lively lifetelling, only occasionally. (Nov.)

Library Journal

The U.S. Supreme Court has the power and the obligation to reassess any lower court decision where a substantial issue of public law is involved. Yet this power of judicial review was not granted to the Court in the Constitution but asserted by Chief Justice John Marshall in an 1803 decision. This was only one landmark opinion in a remarkable 35-year tenure as chief justice. Smith (political science, Univ. of Toronto) helps us to understand Marshall's real accomplishments in defining and shaping the form of our modern constitutional system. Like Charles Hobson's The Great Chief Justice (LJ 9/15/96), she interprets John Marshall's impact on our federal system. But as a political scientist Smith looks more at Marshall and the Court as an institution with power. Hobson as a historian and editor is more concerned with Marshall's written record. Still, both books highlight Marshall's accomplishments in defining the scope of the Court and its real powers. Scholars and informed lay readers will want to compare both interpretations, which are highly recommended for academic, law, and larger public libraries.-Jerry E. Stephens, U.S. Court of Appeals Lib., Oklahoma City

Joseph J. Ellis