What do you think?
Rate this book
Lincoln's Greatest Case: The River, the Bridge, and the Making of America
The untold story of how one sensational trial propelled a self-taught lawyer and a future president into the national spotlight. In the early hours of May 6, 1856, the steamboat Effie Afton barreled into a pillar of the Rock Island Bridge―the first railroad bridge ever to span the Mississippi River. Soon after, the newly constructed vessel, crowded with passengers and livestock, erupted into flames and sank in the river below, taking much of the bridge with it. As lawyer and Lincoln scholar Brian McGinty dramatically reveals in Lincoln's Greatest Case , no one was killed, but the question of who was at fault cried out for an answer. Backed by powerful steamboat interests in St. Louis, the owners of the Effie Afton quickly pressed suit, hoping that a victory would not only prevent the construction of any future bridges from crossing the Mississippi but also thwart the burgeoning spread of railroads from Chicago. The fate of the long-dreamed-of transcontinental railroad lurked ominously in the background, for if rails could not cross the Mississippi by bridge, how could they span the continent all the way to the Pacific? The official title of the case was Hurd et al. v. The Railroad Bridge Company , but it could have been St. Louis v. Chicago , for the transportation future of the whole nation was at stake. Indeed, was it to be dominated by steamboats or by railroads? Conducted at almost the same time as the notorious Dred Scott case, this new trial riveted the nation’s attention. Meanwhile, Abraham Lincoln, already well known as one of the best trial lawyers in Illinois, was summoned to Chicago to join a handful of crack legal practitioners in the defense of the bridge. While there, he succesfully helped unite the disparate regions of the country with a truly transcontinental rail system and, in the process, added to the stellar reputation that vaulted him into the White House less than four years later. Re-creating the Effie Afton case from its unlikely inception to its controversial finale, McGinty brilliantly animates this legal cauldron of the late 1850s, which turned out to be the most consequential trial in Lincoln's nearly quarter century as a lawyer. Along the way, the tall prairie lawyer's consummate legal skills and instincts are also brought to vivid life, as is the history of steamboat traffic on the Mississippi, the progress of railroads west of the Appalachians, and the epochal clashes of railroads and steamboats at the river’s edge. Lincoln's Greatest Case is legal history on a grand scale and an essential first act to a pivotal Lincoln drama we did not know was there. 18 illustrations
272 pages, Hardcover
First published February 9, 2015
36 people are currently reading
704 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 52 reviews
March 20, 2015
This is one of those books that you keep reading because you think it has to get better but never does. This book is really about a court case between steamboat owners and bridge owners that Lincoln happens to be a part of but never really a central character. I was expecting great examples of Lincoln's abilities in the courtroom. How he wowed the world with this case. Instead it was a lot of tedious information about lawyers, judges, and the court case. The case ended on hung jury and the book is based on newspapers' accounts of the trial as the actual court documents have been lost. The author only tenuously links Lincoln's future success to this case.
May 4, 2022
This review is entirely subjective (as I suppose all reviews are), since some reviewers really seemed to like this book. But it didn't really do it for me. I do know to be wary of books that put Abraham Lincoln in the title and on the cover, when the story they aim to tell is not strictly about Lincoln. I get it, marketing and all. So I wasn't expecting great Lincoln insights from this book. But I was at least hoping for a good compelling yarn about an interesting historical event and its broader meaning, yet didn't really feel like I got that either.
The book tells the story of the court case that resulted from the 1856 collision of the Effie Afton steamboat with the Rock Island rail bridge over the Mississippi River, in which the owners of each blamed the other for the accident. The introduction adequately sets up the story as a clash between tradition and progress - were rail bridges an impediment to steamboat traffic, or were steamboats going to have to take a back seat to the rise of the railroads?
From there, though, the book seems to strain to come up with something larger to say, beyond simply recounting the accident and the trial. It tries to position the case as a key turning point in the mid-19th century transportation revolution that saw the railroads overtake steamboats in importance and precedence, and also tries to position the case as a key turning point in Lincoln's rise to prominence. But mostly it's just a straightforward story about the trial, which (spoiler) ended in a hung jury and didn't really establish any important precedent. And Lincoln played only a small part as a member of the defense team, so it didn't really represent a crucially important role in his rise to prominence either.
The accident and the trial are the centerpieces of the book, but the narrative takes a while to get going. The first third of the book largely consists of a brief history of river transportation, railroads, bridge building and Lincoln's legal career. That’s followed by somewhat excessive detail about the steamboat itself, its construction, its cargo and its namesake.
The crash itself is described in a few paragraphs in the middle of a chapter - as the central event in the story, the telling is not nearly as dramatic and compelling as it could be. Then, as the trial is set to begin, we’re treated to mini-biographies of the two potential judges in the case, profiles of the reporters covering the trial, details about the process of jury selection, even the names of all the jurors.
Lincoln lore suggests that he played a greater role in the case than he did. McGinty rightly refutes this, though in the process of doing so, he ends up deliberately minimizing Lincoln's importance to the story, even though his name is prominently featured in the book’s title. If there was any doubt as to the prominence of Lincoln’s role in the case, he virtually disappears from the entire narrative during the trial, appearing for all of one paragraph. He finally gets his due during closing arguments, as McGinty quotes him at length, in a way that suggests his contribution was more notable than others on the defense team who are quoted less extensively. Contrast this with an earlier book on the same subject, Hell Gate of the Mississippi, the Effie Afton Trial and Abraham Lincoln's Role in It, whose title somewhat less eloquently but perhaps more accurately reflects Lincoln's importance to the story.
The anticlimactic end to the trial brings to a close Lincoln’s involvement in the case, as the plaintiffs continued their efforts to pursue their claims, while the railroads continued their rise, with no apparent fallout from the reputedly landmark case.
The story of Lincoln and his times are woven throughout the narrative, in a somewhat forced attempt to elevate his role and the case’s overall historical importance. McGinty describes a lot of parallel historical events with flimsy ties to his main story - we learn all about the Dred Scott case, for example, because Scott once coincidentally briefly lived at Fort Armstrong on Rock Island, long before there was a rail bridge there. We also learn about Lincoln’s youthful participation in the Black Hawk War, because he once coincidentally briefly served at Fort Armstrong.
And we learn about the Kansas-Nebraska Act, for reasons that are not entirely clear. That’s because, in describing the Act, McGinty misses the most obvious historical tie between a parallel event and the Effie Afton case itself - Stephen Douglas’s very motive for promoting Kansas-Nebraska was related to his desire to situate a transcontinental railroad in the north, from Chicago through the Nebraska territory, which seems somewhat relevant to a story about the rise of the railroads.
After the trial ends, the book recounts Lincoln's subsequent political rise. It has nothing really to do with the case, except when McGinty suggests that without the trial, "Lincoln's profile might not have risen as high as it did" - or if it had, his political support "might not have been as enthusiastic." Lincoln "might not have won the enthusiastic political support" of an influential fellow defense attorney - or if he had, "it might not have been as strong." And if none of this had happened, "he might never have won the Republican presidential nomination in 1860 and gone on to win.”
So the Effie Afton case might have been a crucial career turning point for Lincoln! Or it might not have. It might have made Lincoln president! Or it might not have. It might have been a landmark case that changed everything about the future of transportation in the country. Or it might not have. A conclusion that’s filled with so many “mights” just seems to highlight the weakness of the argument.
In the end, the case makes for an interesting little story. But the attempt to turn it into something bigger than it is feels strained, stretched and padded, even in a book that clocks in at less than 200 pages. I probably wouldn’t have picked up this book had Lincoln not been in the title and on the cover. So let’s hear it for marketing - at least that’s one thing about this book that worked.
The book tells the story of the court case that resulted from the 1856 collision of the Effie Afton steamboat with the Rock Island rail bridge over the Mississippi River, in which the owners of each blamed the other for the accident. The introduction adequately sets up the story as a clash between tradition and progress - were rail bridges an impediment to steamboat traffic, or were steamboats going to have to take a back seat to the rise of the railroads?
From there, though, the book seems to strain to come up with something larger to say, beyond simply recounting the accident and the trial. It tries to position the case as a key turning point in the mid-19th century transportation revolution that saw the railroads overtake steamboats in importance and precedence, and also tries to position the case as a key turning point in Lincoln's rise to prominence. But mostly it's just a straightforward story about the trial, which (spoiler) ended in a hung jury and didn't really establish any important precedent. And Lincoln played only a small part as a member of the defense team, so it didn't really represent a crucially important role in his rise to prominence either.
The accident and the trial are the centerpieces of the book, but the narrative takes a while to get going. The first third of the book largely consists of a brief history of river transportation, railroads, bridge building and Lincoln's legal career. That’s followed by somewhat excessive detail about the steamboat itself, its construction, its cargo and its namesake.
The crash itself is described in a few paragraphs in the middle of a chapter - as the central event in the story, the telling is not nearly as dramatic and compelling as it could be. Then, as the trial is set to begin, we’re treated to mini-biographies of the two potential judges in the case, profiles of the reporters covering the trial, details about the process of jury selection, even the names of all the jurors.
Lincoln lore suggests that he played a greater role in the case than he did. McGinty rightly refutes this, though in the process of doing so, he ends up deliberately minimizing Lincoln's importance to the story, even though his name is prominently featured in the book’s title. If there was any doubt as to the prominence of Lincoln’s role in the case, he virtually disappears from the entire narrative during the trial, appearing for all of one paragraph. He finally gets his due during closing arguments, as McGinty quotes him at length, in a way that suggests his contribution was more notable than others on the defense team who are quoted less extensively. Contrast this with an earlier book on the same subject, Hell Gate of the Mississippi, the Effie Afton Trial and Abraham Lincoln's Role in It, whose title somewhat less eloquently but perhaps more accurately reflects Lincoln's importance to the story.
The anticlimactic end to the trial brings to a close Lincoln’s involvement in the case, as the plaintiffs continued their efforts to pursue their claims, while the railroads continued their rise, with no apparent fallout from the reputedly landmark case.
The story of Lincoln and his times are woven throughout the narrative, in a somewhat forced attempt to elevate his role and the case’s overall historical importance. McGinty describes a lot of parallel historical events with flimsy ties to his main story - we learn all about the Dred Scott case, for example, because Scott once coincidentally briefly lived at Fort Armstrong on Rock Island, long before there was a rail bridge there. We also learn about Lincoln’s youthful participation in the Black Hawk War, because he once coincidentally briefly served at Fort Armstrong.
And we learn about the Kansas-Nebraska Act, for reasons that are not entirely clear. That’s because, in describing the Act, McGinty misses the most obvious historical tie between a parallel event and the Effie Afton case itself - Stephen Douglas’s very motive for promoting Kansas-Nebraska was related to his desire to situate a transcontinental railroad in the north, from Chicago through the Nebraska territory, which seems somewhat relevant to a story about the rise of the railroads.
After the trial ends, the book recounts Lincoln's subsequent political rise. It has nothing really to do with the case, except when McGinty suggests that without the trial, "Lincoln's profile might not have risen as high as it did" - or if it had, his political support "might not have been as enthusiastic." Lincoln "might not have won the enthusiastic political support" of an influential fellow defense attorney - or if he had, "it might not have been as strong." And if none of this had happened, "he might never have won the Republican presidential nomination in 1860 and gone on to win.”
So the Effie Afton case might have been a crucial career turning point for Lincoln! Or it might not have. It might have made Lincoln president! Or it might not have. It might have been a landmark case that changed everything about the future of transportation in the country. Or it might not have. A conclusion that’s filled with so many “mights” just seems to highlight the weakness of the argument.
In the end, the case makes for an interesting little story. But the attempt to turn it into something bigger than it is feels strained, stretched and padded, even in a book that clocks in at less than 200 pages. I probably wouldn’t have picked up this book had Lincoln not been in the title and on the cover. So let’s hear it for marketing - at least that’s one thing about this book that worked.
July 9, 2015
As a native son of Rock Island, IL, I learned about Lincoln's role in the Effie Afton steamboat case at sometime in my local schooling. When I read a review of Lincoln's Greatest Case in the the Times and then saw it on the shelves of my neighborhood library, I decided to read it. I think that Mr. McGinty's book could have made a decent article, but there is not enough material to justify a book, even a slim volume. I managed to slog through the pages of numbing detail about the trial, the design of the railroad bridge. I would not recommend anyone to follow my exampl,e.
February 13, 2020
A rather short book, but the definitive account of the Effie Afton trial of 1857, which legal historian McGinty argues was the most important one of Abraham Lincoln's nearly 25-year career as a lawyer. This is Hurd et al v. The Railroad Bridge Co. The steamboat "Effie Afton" (owned by Hurd) crashed into the RR bridge spanning the Mississippi River from Rock Island, Illinois to Davenport, Iowa and then caught fire. Hurd sued for damages---and also have the Rock Island Bridge removed as an obstruction to river traffic. In this battle of the railroad versus the steamboat, Lincoln came in on the side of the railroad. McGinty goes into great detail about the case-and the importance of it for the development of America--and for Abraham Lincoln. A fascinating story about a comparatively overlooked aspect of Lincoln's life.
July 2, 2020
A good little history book on a limited but important topic. The book is well organized and reported. The role of and importance to Lincoln are soundly explored. There are connections to Lincoln's future and our Country's history disclosed in the story but I cannot give the fifth star. Big parts of it is a discussion of a somewhat droll lawsuit. The politics around the suit are relevant and important but an author can only do so much with that.
March 18, 2015
A fascinating book about one of Lincoln's most important but little discussed trials. The trial was that of Hurd et al. v. The Railroad Bridge Company and pits powerful Mississippi River steamboat interests against those of the nascent railroad companies.
In short, a side-wheeler steamboat, the Effie Afton, plows into the piers of a railroad bridge crossing over the Mississippi River at Rock Island between Illinois and Davenport, Iowa. The first bridge to be built over the river, the results of the trial would determine the future of railroading in America.
Author Brian McGinty does an excellent job weaving the history and future ramifications of the struggle between north/south river commerce and east/west railroad commerce into an entertaining and informative "play-by-play" of the trial. Lincoln's role is actually frustratingly small, but he plays a critical role in demonstrating the technical aspects of the case to the jury during closing arguments.
The book is well-written, and its brevity (only about 200 pages) makes it readable by anyone interested in Abraham Lincoln and/or the birth of the railroads.
In short, a side-wheeler steamboat, the Effie Afton, plows into the piers of a railroad bridge crossing over the Mississippi River at Rock Island between Illinois and Davenport, Iowa. The first bridge to be built over the river, the results of the trial would determine the future of railroading in America.
Author Brian McGinty does an excellent job weaving the history and future ramifications of the struggle between north/south river commerce and east/west railroad commerce into an entertaining and informative "play-by-play" of the trial. Lincoln's role is actually frustratingly small, but he plays a critical role in demonstrating the technical aspects of the case to the jury during closing arguments.
The book is well-written, and its brevity (only about 200 pages) makes it readable by anyone interested in Abraham Lincoln and/or the birth of the railroads.
September 19, 2016
I chose this popular history book as the text for a colloquium I taught at the 58th annual Washington State Judicial Conference. Twenty five judges read the text in advance of the day-long class/discussion. The book, written by a lawyer about lawyers, relates the story of the 1857 case of Jacob S. Hurd, Joseph W. Smith, and Alexander W. Kidwell vs. The Railroad Bridge Company – popularly known as the Effie Afton case. The Effie Afton was a steamboat which ran into a bridge footing and started an awful fuss. Students of Abraham Lincoln, well fed on the events of his presidency and on the Lincoln-Douglas debates, are treated to another aspect of this famous man's life: his work as a trial lawyer. McGinty also has an historian's eye for where this case fits in the story of the opening of the West to the railroads, a necessary step in the expansion of the nation. The transcripts of the trial were lost in the Great Chicago Fire; McGinty reconstructs the trial from newspaper accounts. The book is short, interesting and useful.
November 20, 2021
A fascinating snapshot of Lincoln before his rise to fame, this book does not disappoint. Written by an attorney, the book is surprisingly concise and easy to read. The book details the Effie Afton vs. Rock Island Bridge Co. case, a case that really boils down to a question of freedom of navigation. The issue was whether the bridge imposed an undue encumbrance to free navigation of the Mississippi River. A very good read.
August 14, 2021
This book is not for everybody, as can readily seen by the large number of lackluster reviews. But for those into niche history, and this particular niche, it’s an excellent informative read.
By niche history (a phrase I may have just invented), I mean history that is more small picture than the standard tracts that tend to focus on heads of state and wars, and bigger picture than everyday-life kinds of surveys (which I like a lot) or biographies (which I also like a lot). Niche history, to me, is something that gives an on-the-ground as-if-you-were-there of a particular topic. In this case, it was a major trial that pitted the owners of a large Mississippi River cargo-and-passenger steamboat against the owners of a bridge built across the river to accommodate newly developing east-west railroad traffic. Lincoln wasn’t the lead attorney, but he played an instrumental role in for the defense legal team (representing the bridge).
I can see where a lot of content came across as dry to those who are not into law or infrastructure, but for those who are, this book presents is a fascinating picture of early infrastructure battles. Today, we fight over highways, clean energy, clean power, etc. Back then, it was mainly transportation; steamboats versus railroads. And given the age of the U.S. and the state of development, the stakes were higher than just transit details. Steamboat movement was mainly north-south. Railroad movement was a bit north-south but was pushing east-wet in ways steamboats couldn’t match. So the viability of railroad had much to do with our westward development. Needless to say, there were entrenched interests on both sides — to the point where the trial could be seen as St. Louis (riverboat) vs. Chicago (railroad).
Narration of the trial is very well handled. By the time the author finishes presenting the plaintiff’s case, the reader wonders if the bridge has any viable defense at all. But then, the bridge gets its turn. If you’ve ever seen a trial, or served on a jury, you’ll recognize the real feel of this ebb and flow. As an extra bonus, we get a less mythic more human view of Lincoln and can see how he evolved from just a guy to an iconic President.
By niche history (a phrase I may have just invented), I mean history that is more small picture than the standard tracts that tend to focus on heads of state and wars, and bigger picture than everyday-life kinds of surveys (which I like a lot) or biographies (which I also like a lot). Niche history, to me, is something that gives an on-the-ground as-if-you-were-there of a particular topic. In this case, it was a major trial that pitted the owners of a large Mississippi River cargo-and-passenger steamboat against the owners of a bridge built across the river to accommodate newly developing east-west railroad traffic. Lincoln wasn’t the lead attorney, but he played an instrumental role in for the defense legal team (representing the bridge).
I can see where a lot of content came across as dry to those who are not into law or infrastructure, but for those who are, this book presents is a fascinating picture of early infrastructure battles. Today, we fight over highways, clean energy, clean power, etc. Back then, it was mainly transportation; steamboats versus railroads. And given the age of the U.S. and the state of development, the stakes were higher than just transit details. Steamboat movement was mainly north-south. Railroad movement was a bit north-south but was pushing east-wet in ways steamboats couldn’t match. So the viability of railroad had much to do with our westward development. Needless to say, there were entrenched interests on both sides — to the point where the trial could be seen as St. Louis (riverboat) vs. Chicago (railroad).
Narration of the trial is very well handled. By the time the author finishes presenting the plaintiff’s case, the reader wonders if the bridge has any viable defense at all. But then, the bridge gets its turn. If you’ve ever seen a trial, or served on a jury, you’ll recognize the real feel of this ebb and flow. As an extra bonus, we get a less mythic more human view of Lincoln and can see how he evolved from just a guy to an iconic President.
August 25, 2015
I love all things Abraham Lincoln, and this was a good story about his participation in a trial pitting the steamboat industry against the emerging railroad industry. McGinty makes the case that Lincoln's summary in the trial was pivotal to his political career.
The story is pieced together from newspaper accounts and the legal papers of Lincoln, as the trial transcript was lost in the 1871 Chicago fire. So there is by necessity supposition as to actions, words, etc., but McGinty supposes based on the historical record of other trials and such.
I learned a lot about the fierce competition between steamboats and railroad, and the history of each, which was fascinating. The politics of progress and change is always worth studying.
We can all wish that the transcript had survived, but absent that, McGinty does a fine job. It was a great case for Lincoln, as well as for the expansion of the USA.
The story is pieced together from newspaper accounts and the legal papers of Lincoln, as the trial transcript was lost in the 1871 Chicago fire. So there is by necessity supposition as to actions, words, etc., but McGinty supposes based on the historical record of other trials and such.
I learned a lot about the fierce competition between steamboats and railroad, and the history of each, which was fascinating. The politics of progress and change is always worth studying.
We can all wish that the transcript had survived, but absent that, McGinty does a fine job. It was a great case for Lincoln, as well as for the expansion of the USA.
December 16, 2017
Although I liked parts of this book, this book is guilty of false advertisement. Very little of the actual court case involves Lincoln. I think he is mentioned once during the trial and then there are about 10 pages about Lincoln’s closing argument. McGinty was clearly limited by his primary source material (all the court records were destroyed in the Chicago Fire), but Lincoln is by far the main character. Also, the trial ended in a hung jury, and Lincoln wasn’t involved with the rest of the case, which went on for about two decades. I think McGinty tries to fit a square peg into a round hole here, and it just didn’t work for me unfortunately.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
April 12, 2018
I found it interesting to read this book set in our local area. I did not know that the bridge across the Mississippi at Rock Island, Illinois, was the first one to cross the river. It did not happen without turmoil, and there were lawsuits and challenges for many years. The steamboat operators were not happy with losing business and also felt that the river traffic was impeded by this bridge. The powers that be in St. Louis tried to derail this also, but mainly (it seemed) because they wanted a bridge in that location. The book was not a page-turner, but it was good background for someone living in western Illinois.
July 18, 2016
TEDIOUS!! This book is an exhaustive legal history of a pivotal case in 1857, pitting the railroad vs. river (steamship) commerce. It does not work as popular literature, however! Too many details, which are not central to the story, bog it down. It took me over 2 weeks to slog through only 191 pages of text.
As was true of many issues of the time, the future of slavery hinged on a more southern bridge across the Mississippi River, than the first one, built at Rock Island between Illinois and Iowa.
Lincoln entered the case as a courtroom lawyer, and his team, for the RR, prevailed. Because of the publicity surrounding the case, more people became aware of his strength of memory and argument; the lead counsel, Judd, helped propel Lincoln's political fortunes toward the presidency of the United States. (The steamship that sank in the original case was the Effie Afton--probably due to reckless piloting, but the case resulted in a hung jury.)
As was true of many issues of the time, the future of slavery hinged on a more southern bridge across the Mississippi River, than the first one, built at Rock Island between Illinois and Iowa.
Lincoln entered the case as a courtroom lawyer, and his team, for the RR, prevailed. Because of the publicity surrounding the case, more people became aware of his strength of memory and argument; the lead counsel, Judd, helped propel Lincoln's political fortunes toward the presidency of the United States. (The steamship that sank in the original case was the Effie Afton--probably due to reckless piloting, but the case resulted in a hung jury.)
April 29, 2016
I received this book through "Good Reads Giveaway."
This is a highly detailed and researched book about our greatest president, giving us insight into Lincoln's personality and skills as a lawyer. It enhances my appreciation of the man and of 19th Century America.
We feel so "short changed" by today's political scene where the TV Personality seems more important than the message. It is a pleasure to read about a "flesh and blood" man who demonstrated honesty, intelligence and competence.
This is a highly detailed and researched book about our greatest president, giving us insight into Lincoln's personality and skills as a lawyer. It enhances my appreciation of the man and of 19th Century America.
We feel so "short changed" by today's political scene where the TV Personality seems more important than the message. It is a pleasure to read about a "flesh and blood" man who demonstrated honesty, intelligence and competence.
August 9, 2015
My boss loaned me this book unasked. When your boss just loans you a book, you feel obligated to read it. But, i couldn't care less about the war between ships and rail. That said, there were some interesting things tidbits in the book. But, the author did seem to be all over the place. For a book that's supposed to be about a specific case there was a great deal of background on Lincoln's early law career and his entrance into politics.
August 22, 2015
An easy read, McGinty puts the ?Effie Afton case in context of Lincoln's life and development as a lawyer and politician together with some pertinent social and economic history. It was a disappointment in the sense that the records of the time are too sketchy to convey a real sense of Lincoln's courtroom performance. A nit: I noted the term "principal" used where it ought to have been "principle."
August 15, 2015
Hard to believe now, but for Lincoln's capability as an able lawyers, railroad bridges might not have been allowed to cross rivers. The outcome of a trial, are bridges a hindrance to navigation or vital to the nations progress from East to West? Steamboats against the railroads. Lincoln got a $400. fee and the author got a book.
August 31, 2015
This was an interesting look at Lincoln from a different angle. It's nice to see iconic figures presented in different ways like this. I did think the author stretched the point of this being his greatest case a bit far at times, but he did have some salient points that this case was a turning point for American transportation.
September 21, 2015
I kept going back and forth between 2 and 3 stars. Parts of the book were really interesting and some of it was just tedious, especially the day by day rehash of the trial. There was a lot of repetition. I finally decided that the historical timeline included all of the information you needed to know and the book was unnecessary. This would have been better as a magazine article or feature.
November 3, 2015
Not only is this a look at a pivotal point in Lincoln's life, it is an examination of the transition from water transportation to railroads. It reminded me of another book, "River Horse," in which the author points out that we have turned our backs on our rivers. They were once the lifeblood of the nation, carrying produce and news and people throughout the land.
September 2, 2015
If you are a lawyer, a Lincoln-phile, and/or interested in the story of America's westward expansion, then you'll really enjoy this book. If you are none of those things, you'll probably be bored, even though it is well written.
April 20, 2019
This book is a detailed historical account of an important case about... Bridges! The author provides what I would call a "legal archaeological" account of Hurd et al. v. The Railroad Bridge Company, a case heard in Chicago in 1857. Known as the "Effie Afton" case, so named after the steamboat owned by the plaintiffs, the case is of interest due to the makeup of the legal team which included (later) President Abraham Lincoln, then circuit lawyer. It is also a very significant legal case as it impacted. The Effie Afton had run into the base of a newly built railroad bridge linking Illinois to Iowa, destroying the boat and all of the contents on board. The plaintiffs sued the railroad company claiming that the bridge was an obstruction and a denial of legal rights to free navigation of the waterways. Obstensibly, the question for the court was whether a railroad bridge be built across the Mississippi without violating the navigation rights of steamboats?
Information about the case, about how waterways and railroads contributed to industrialization in the USA and even the account of the engineering that went into building the railroad bridge, are all explained in incredible detail. I am a lawyer, who is writing in legal geography, and comes from a family of engineers; so all of these elements were a delight for me. However the authors' lawyerly habit of detailing the specifics of a story, incorporating all the facts and accounting for his interpretation of the Effie Afton case can be a difficult read. For the generalist who is interest in Lincoln the lawyer (which I imagine is an important body of the readership of the book), the author captures the work ethic and drive of Lincoln in an excellent way. The path of Lincoln as he built himself up as a lawyer, by working with his community, developing political acumen and dedicating himself to cases he was involved in, is important insight to the hardwork of the path Lincoln took.
I would give this book 3.5/5 for the generalist reader, but 4.5/5 for specialist readers who have an interest in transportation law and legal history.
Information about the case, about how waterways and railroads contributed to industrialization in the USA and even the account of the engineering that went into building the railroad bridge, are all explained in incredible detail. I am a lawyer, who is writing in legal geography, and comes from a family of engineers; so all of these elements were a delight for me. However the authors' lawyerly habit of detailing the specifics of a story, incorporating all the facts and accounting for his interpretation of the Effie Afton case can be a difficult read. For the generalist who is interest in Lincoln the lawyer (which I imagine is an important body of the readership of the book), the author captures the work ethic and drive of Lincoln in an excellent way. The path of Lincoln as he built himself up as a lawyer, by working with his community, developing political acumen and dedicating himself to cases he was involved in, is important insight to the hardwork of the path Lincoln took.
I would give this book 3.5/5 for the generalist reader, but 4.5/5 for specialist readers who have an interest in transportation law and legal history.
May 19, 2019
Great societal advances flow from a variety of events. “Lincoln’s Greatest Case” is the story of the Rock Island Bridge case in which Abraham Lincoln, a part of the bridge company’s legal defense team, opened a path for America’s advancement into the Age of Railroading.
The railroad bridge between Rock Island, Illinois and Davenport, Iowa was opened in 1856. Railroad bridges posed challenges to the steamboats that dominated the transportation industry to that time. When the “Effie Afton” crashed into the bridge two weeks after its opening, the resulting damage to the bridge and loss of the boat set the stage for a damage suit that would determine whether railroads would span the continent or be interrupted at every navigable stream plied by commercial vessels. I will not spoil the suspense by giving away the outcome but you undoubtably have seen trains cross great rivers.
This tome presents the background of the railroads, the lawyers, including Lincoln, who represented them, the steamboat interests who opposed them, the litigation that decided the issue and the personal and industrial changes that flowed in its wake. Author Brian McGinty has blended commercial and national history with the legal proceedings to produce an enjoyable read about a crucial but often overlooked segment of the American Saga. As a life-long resident of the St. Louis area I took interest in the implication of the involvement of St. Louis interests, including the Chamber of Commerce in opposition to railroad bridges. As a lawyer I enjoyed the description of actions preceding and occurring during the trial. I do not believe that this work delves into legal minutiae so as to boor non-lawyers. It provides an interesting insight into Lincoln Lore not directly associated with the Civil War. I recommend “Lincoln’s Greatest Case” for anyone interested in the case itself, Lincoln, the building of the railroads or just the American Pageant.
The railroad bridge between Rock Island, Illinois and Davenport, Iowa was opened in 1856. Railroad bridges posed challenges to the steamboats that dominated the transportation industry to that time. When the “Effie Afton” crashed into the bridge two weeks after its opening, the resulting damage to the bridge and loss of the boat set the stage for a damage suit that would determine whether railroads would span the continent or be interrupted at every navigable stream plied by commercial vessels. I will not spoil the suspense by giving away the outcome but you undoubtably have seen trains cross great rivers.
This tome presents the background of the railroads, the lawyers, including Lincoln, who represented them, the steamboat interests who opposed them, the litigation that decided the issue and the personal and industrial changes that flowed in its wake. Author Brian McGinty has blended commercial and national history with the legal proceedings to produce an enjoyable read about a crucial but often overlooked segment of the American Saga. As a life-long resident of the St. Louis area I took interest in the implication of the involvement of St. Louis interests, including the Chamber of Commerce in opposition to railroad bridges. As a lawyer I enjoyed the description of actions preceding and occurring during the trial. I do not believe that this work delves into legal minutiae so as to boor non-lawyers. It provides an interesting insight into Lincoln Lore not directly associated with the Civil War. I recommend “Lincoln’s Greatest Case” for anyone interested in the case itself, Lincoln, the building of the railroads or just the American Pageant.
March 4, 2020
This is a rather short book and a rather quick read. Author Brian McGinty definitely knows his stuff and there is lots of history packed into this book. But it is not anything broad, but instead very detailed and focused on one case (of thousands) that Abraham Lincoln worked on professionally.
As someone who grew up in the Chicagoland area (the trial was in Chicago) and now lives in Iowa and regularly drives through the quad cities (crossing the Mississippi River near where the bridge used to be) I found this history to be a little more relevant than perhaps the average reader would.
The trial was brought by the owners of a steamboat that had hit the bridge (the defendant) and ultimately sank. Spoiler Alert: If you are looking for an exciting story about a storm or freak accident or dramatic rescue, then keep looking. This collision was very lame.
Lots of great history and interesting anecdotes in this book. It very much supplemented my knowledge of the time and Lincoln based on "Team of Rivals". If readers have not already familiarized themselves with this sort of history, they may be missing out.
There was plenty about politics and the intersection between politics and law. Lots about how courts and trials were conducted in the olden days. Quite a bit about the economic/transportation history.
The drama of the courtroom left me wanting more, but I was pleased to see the thru-line in the end where the trial led to (spoiler alert) connections for Lincoln, which helped secure him the nomination for US Senator against Stephen Douglas, and led to the famous debates vs. Douglas, which led to speaking invitations in New York, which raised his profile, and led him to win the Presidential nomination.
I recommend readers keep the internet handy so they can look up maps and pictures of bridges while reading. For people interested in Lincoln history, trains, and/or economic progress, put this book on your reading list.
As someone who grew up in the Chicagoland area (the trial was in Chicago) and now lives in Iowa and regularly drives through the quad cities (crossing the Mississippi River near where the bridge used to be) I found this history to be a little more relevant than perhaps the average reader would.
The trial was brought by the owners of a steamboat that had hit the bridge (the defendant) and ultimately sank. Spoiler Alert: If you are looking for an exciting story about a storm or freak accident or dramatic rescue, then keep looking. This collision was very lame.
Lots of great history and interesting anecdotes in this book. It very much supplemented my knowledge of the time and Lincoln based on "Team of Rivals". If readers have not already familiarized themselves with this sort of history, they may be missing out.
There was plenty about politics and the intersection between politics and law. Lots about how courts and trials were conducted in the olden days. Quite a bit about the economic/transportation history.
The drama of the courtroom left me wanting more, but I was pleased to see the thru-line in the end where the trial led to (spoiler alert) connections for Lincoln, which helped secure him the nomination for US Senator against Stephen Douglas, and led to the famous debates vs. Douglas, which led to speaking invitations in New York, which raised his profile, and led him to win the Presidential nomination.
I recommend readers keep the internet handy so they can look up maps and pictures of bridges while reading. For people interested in Lincoln history, trains, and/or economic progress, put this book on your reading list.
June 1, 2018
Lincoln’s Greatest Case: the river, the bridge and the making of America by Brian McGinty is far better than I had anticipated it would be. Now I know that has more than a hint of “damned with faint praise” to it but that is not what I intend; rather that Lincoln has been written about so extensively that would be hard for anyone to craft something truly new and for any work to not veer into hagiography. McGinty succeeds at both – the Effie Affron case – while familiar to many legal historians receives an insightful new twist by the author’s focus on the role that Lincoln played in the case and Lincoln gets a fresh look from McGinty’s work in exploring how that case shaped the future presidents view of infrastructure type projects. McGinty does an excellent job weaving into the story Lincoln’s growing network of political contacts and his developing influence without overplaying that at the cost of his work on the case. In all, this work is interesting, engagingly written and very well researched. I would recommend it to anyone interested in the development of 19th century legal theory and for anyone interested in a different approach to understanding Abraham Lincoln.
February 18, 2023
I liked it, and it's an interesting story, but to get a book out of it, McGinty did some padding. I can't decide if my favorite padding was telling us that 11 of the 15 presidents before Lincoln were lawyers, and then listing them, then telling us that only 4 were not, and then listing them, or whether it was giving us a short biography of the woman whose pen name was Effie Afton, after which the steamboat in the lawsuit was named.
But while there's padding, there seems to be a glaring hole. McGinty doesn't discuss why the defense (the side Lincoln was on) chose to have a jury trial. That would have been their choice, right? And my understanding is that if you have a clear case, you don't want a jury, who might screw things up for you. So the decision to have a jury matters. And if that has been lost to history, that's at least worth mentioning.
But what's covered is interesting, and it's interesting to see what a small world the pre-war United States was - Jefferson Davis shows up as a bad guy, and Salmon Chase comes up too.
But while there's padding, there seems to be a glaring hole. McGinty doesn't discuss why the defense (the side Lincoln was on) chose to have a jury trial. That would have been their choice, right? And my understanding is that if you have a clear case, you don't want a jury, who might screw things up for you. So the decision to have a jury matters. And if that has been lost to history, that's at least worth mentioning.
But what's covered is interesting, and it's interesting to see what a small world the pre-war United States was - Jefferson Davis shows up as a bad guy, and Salmon Chase comes up too.
January 2, 2021
McGinty is a great author. In his legal history books, his lawyerly acumen always shows through (see "John Brown's Trial"). Considering the original trial transcripts burned in the Chicago Fire, the author did a good job of pulling together the case and Lincoln's involvement in it: pre-trial, in the courtroom, and post-trial. I particularly enjoyed the 10-page section specifically on Lincoln's closing argument in the case, as it gave a glimpse into his courtroom style. Lawyers can learn a lot from that style: "His voice, no doubt, carried a tone of assurance. He was dealing with facts, and when he spoke of facts he did so with confidence. And, as always, he spoke honestly."
October 21, 2021
The problem with this book is made clear by the fact that the author says that this case only gets a small place in larger biographies of Lincoln. While the case is important, there is not that much to say about it and a lot of this book is padding. It would be better if this was talked about in the scope of transportation law rather than putting it into Lincoln's life. That being said the writing of it is good and it moves quickly.
December 16, 2023
This is a unique Lincoln story and an interesting tale of the struggle of traditional, normalized technology against newer technology racing to gain ascendancy. I enjoyed the courtroom drama. Obviously both sides could have avoided this day through better design of the bridge and better more careful navigation of the Effie Afton.
I enjoyed the historical background and the wrap-up of events after the trial. And Richard Poe's narration was superb!
I enjoyed the historical background and the wrap-up of events after the trial. And Richard Poe's narration was superb!
November 18, 2018
I expected a little more when I started reading this book. I thought the author would provide more information on the actual speech that Lincoln did on his famous case. I have to say that my expectations have an impact on the judgement of this book. Writing style was great, language was easy to understand but I just felt disappointed with the way the story was told.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 52 reviews