Henry Clay: America's Greatest Statesman

by Harlow Giles Unger

Henry Clay: America's Greatest Statesman

Genres: Biography, History, American History, Nonfiction, Politics, Audiobook, Biography Memoir

335 pages, Kindle Edition

First published September 29, 2015

About the author

Harlow Giles Unger is an American author, historian, journalist, broadcaster, and educator known for his extensive work on American history and education. Educated at the Taft School, Yale College, and California State University, Unger began his career as a journalist for the New York Herald Tribune Overseas News Service in Paris. He later wrote for newspapers and magazines across Britain, Canada, and other countries, while also working in radio broadcasting and teaching English and journalism at New York-area colleges.
Unger has written over twenty-seven books, including ten biographies of America's Founding Fathers and a notable biography of Henry Clay. His historical works include Noah Webster: The Life and Times of an American Patriot, The Last Founding Father: James Monroe and a Nation’s Call to Greatness, and First Founding Father: Richard Henry Lee and the Call to Independence. He is also the author of the Encyclopedia of American Education, a three-volume reference work.
A former Distinguished Visiting Fellow in American History at Mount Vernon, Unger has lived in Paris and currently resides in New York City. An avid skier and horseman, he has spent time in Chamonix, France, and Jackson Hole, Wyoming. He has one son, Richard C. Unger.

Reviews

[Michael Trapani · Rating 4 out of 5]

This rating is largely dependent on what you’re looking for going into this book. I’ll echo many of the reviews and say that if you have limited knowledge of Henry Clay and are looking to gain a basic understanding of his impact to determine if you’d like to study him further, this is a great place to start. It’s quick, accessible, and doesn’t require an intimate knowledge of the era to understand. However, if you are already well-versed in Clay history, you likely won’t uncover anything you don’t already know. Go with Klotter, Remini, or the Heidlers for a deeper analysis. Eaton, Van Deusen and Schurz are dated but offer a deeper analysis as well (although Schurz writes with a political bias).

[Sharon Barrow Wilfong · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have long wanted to read a biography of Henry Clay ever since I saw his portrait in my book of photographs by Matthew Brady.

After reading a biography of Andrew Jackson and his acrimonious relationship with Clay, I was determined that the next biography I read would be of Henry Clay.

Clay never won his bid for presidency, but he was a powerful statesman who, while thwarted by Jackson it seemed at every turn, nevertheless helped shape the Union in what we know it today. In fact much of the credit to Lincoln's accomplishments should rightly go to Clay. Even Lincoln's speeches were heavily laced with Clay's words.

Clay helped stave off the inevitable internal conflict that would ravage North and South by compromising for the sake of unity. He saw the preservation of the Union of the states as the most important goal.

Unger's book also helped further clarify for me the goals of Federalists, like Jackson who believed that the president had sole responsibility to represent the people and people like Clay, Daniel Webster, and John Quincy Adams, who believed in state autonomy.

By ultra abolitionists, he was decried for what they perceived as his playing soft ball with the slave states, but others saw Clay as being a realistic strategist who believed the way to abolish slavery would be through a gradual process which would allow transition for both plantation owners as well as slaves. Ultimately this was not to be, but it was while Clay was alive.

Unger gives us a colorful, interesting documentation of Henry Clay's life, both as a devoted husband and family man and as a politician. On the sidelines we get a good view of the various wars that took place during his tenure on the Senate and the events that led up to an increasingly tense conflict of interests between free states and states with slavery that would explode soon after his death and during Lincoln's presidency.

Overall, an excellent historical reference.

[Andy Miller · Rating 3 out of 5]

I do not recommend this biography of Henry Clay if you are looking for depth and analysis about Clay and his times; read Robert Remini's gold standard biography of Henry Clay for that. However, Unger's biography is a nice outline of Clay's life that spots the issues of his times.
Henry Clay did have a full life, he was essentially abandoned as a young boy in Virginia when his family moved to Kentucky, but young Clay worked hard and studied under the famous George Wyeth to become a lawyer. He then moved to Kentucky and developed a very successful legal and business career which was helped by a marriage into a wealthy, powerful Kentucky family. The biography continues with Clay's election to the House of Representatives where he quickly became the Speaker of the House, he is credited with being the first "modern" Speaker. His leadership led to him being selected to the team that negotiated the end of the War of 1812 along with John Quincy Adams, there are amusing stories of the relationship between the austere Adams and the partying, poker playing, womanizing Clay.
The 1824 Presidential election and "The Corrupt Bargain" defined Clay for the rest of his life. Many historians argue that there was unfairness to Clay in this, he had long had contempt for Andrew Jackson before the election and viewed the potential of a Jackson Presidency as a disaster and his disagreements with John Quincy Adams were tempered with his respect for him. It was natural for him to use his third place finish to swing the election to Adams and it was likewise natural for Adams to offer the Secretary of State position to Clay given Clay's experience in foreign policy and political leadership. However, the timing of the two and Clay's reputation for ambition led to the backlash over the Corrupt Bargain and was something that the politically astute Adams and Clay should have anticipated.
Clay's political story continues, he argued for the federal government building roads and canals, the infrastructure of the day, to make the United States truly united and become a modern power. He had uneven success in that in face of opposition to limited government advocates and those who feared that roads could aid the escape of runaway slaves. Clay then led the opposition to Jackson's Presidency including the Senate's censure of Jackson over the National Bank. He also ran again for President, sometimes becoming the Whig's nominee and losing the election, other times being denied the nomination. Unger reminds us that Clay actually said what he became famous for "I would rather be right than President" one of the unpopular issues he took over the years was his opposition to the annexation of Texas, he correctly feared that it further divide a country already polarized by the slavery debate.
Clay receives credit for keeping the country together through his compromises. Unger repeats this as a good thing without much analysis and often praises Clay for providing middle ground against radical abolitionists. However, careful analysis belies much of Clay's work. We did eventually have instant emancipation and it did not lead to catastrophe, it was the southern resistance, the KKK and the abandonment of Reconstruction that led to that. And the "radical" abolitionists were radical only in that they thought that slavery should end immediately as opposed to those who like Clay who opposed slavery (even while owning slaves) without a real plan to end it.
While I was disappointed in Unger's writing about Clay's political life, I think he did an excellent job in writing of Clay's personal life. He details his wild lifestyle and womanizing as a young man while his wife was giving birth to his plethora of children and raising them and how Clay's absences led to an emotional distance to the older ones. As Clay got older his focus shifted more to family and led to his personal devastation with the deaths of so many of his children and the mental illness and alcoholism of others, Unger brings these parts of Clay to hearbreaking life.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

Henry Clay is a relatively forgotten figure today, because he never became president, but in his day, he was a national figure with an enormous impact on American politics. I've come to quite appreciate Harlow Giles Unger's short biographies; he's written quite a few books about the B-listers of American history, and as accompaniments to the presidential biographies I've been reading, they really fill in a lot of detail.

Clay was born the year after American independence. He got his start as a Kentucky lawyer. Fond of drinking, gambling, and womanizing, he married Lucretia Hart, a homely girl with a rich father.

Like so many of our early statesman, Henry Clay was complicated, a mix of virtues and vices. He was an able criminal attorney, and more or less invented the insanity defense, when he got a woman off for killing her sister-in-law. He once told a grinning defendant, "Perhaps I save too many like you who ought to be hanged." He resigned as prosecutor rather than prosecute a slave who killed an overseer who was beating him. He often wrote about the injustices of slavery, and his desire that slavery should be abolished.

And yet (you may have seen this coming) he was a slave owner.

Clay started his political career in the Kentucky state legislature, and while speaker of the Kentucky state house, he challenged another legislator to a duel. Despite firing three times at one another with intent to kill, both of them survived.

Clay would later fight another duel while a U.S. Senator, with Senator John Randolph of Virginia, over an insult issued on the Senate floor. Even though the Senate had rules specifically "privileging" speech on the floor so that Senators couldn't challenge each other over insults during political debates, Randolph waived his privileges. He was in fact widely considered to be not in his right mind and Clay was mocked for challenging a crazy person to a duel, though once again, both of them survived, and they played cards together the next week. Honor culture was quite a thing.

Clay was elected to the House of Representatives in 1810. He remained a practicing a lawyer even after being elected to public office. His most famous client was Aaron Burr. Clay defended the former Vice President against charges of treason for supposedly planning to create his own empire west of the Mississippi. (In fact, Burr probably was trying to do that, but Clay still believed the charges against him were bullshit and Thomas Jefferson was just trying to railroad him.) He was elected as Speaker of the House, becoming the youngest Speaker ever, and the first (and only) freshman Congressman to hold that office. As Speaker, Clay would transform the House, turning it from what had been a bunch of presidential yes-men and lackeys into an independent branch that challenged executive power. I found Clay's rise in molding the House in his image to be similar to Lyndon Johnson's rise, a century and a half later, as he took over the Senate.

President Madison asked Clay to go to Europe with John Quincy Adams to try to negotiate an end to the War of 1812. While John Quincy was up early in the morning to read his Bible, Clay and the other American delegates would still be up from a late night of carousing and gambling. They thought John Quincy was a no-fun Puritan scold, and John Quincy thought Clay was a redneck lout. It was Clay's gregariousness that kept the tired and demoralized Americans from going home, and Adams and Clay together eventually managed to negotiate the Treaty of Ghent. They didn't exactly start as friends, but Adams and Clay would work together for the rest of their lives. 34 years later, as John Quincy Adams lay dying on the floor of the House chambers, Henry Clay would say good-bye to him and be overwhelmed with emotion.

Back in Washington, Clay was riding high on the public perception that they had "forced the British to surrender," even though the Battle of New Orleans was fought after the Treaty of Ghent had already been signed. But the hero of New Orleans, Andrew Jackson, was also riding high. Clay didn't think Jackson was qualified for office just because he was a military leader. During the election of 1824, the first of Clay's four attempts to become President, he finished fourth in a five-man race that split the electoral votes, forcing the House to choose the winner. Despite having lost humiliatingly, Clay was suddenly in a kingmaking position, since all the other candidates needed his support (and electoral votes) to win. All of them, even Jackson, approached him, but it was after a private talk with John Quincy Adams that Clay threw his support behind Adams. Adams became President, he appointed Clay his Secretary of State, and Andrew Jackson denounced the "Corrupt Bargain." Clay and Jackson would be mortal political enemies forever after.

While Clay has to this day been accused of making a "Corrupt Bargain" to become Secretary of State (which, back then, was an even more powerful position than it is today, and was usually a stepping stone to the Presidency), in fairness, he and Adams had a lot of other reasons to team up. They had gotten to know each other back in Ghent, and Adams supported Clay's "American System," which was an ambitious program to expand America's wealth and infrastructure with a combination of protective tariffs, a national bank, and a national transportation system. In fact, Clay had been inspired by the work of Alexander Hamilton, and he would also revive Hamilton's doctrine of "implied powers."

Unfortunately, John Quincy Adams proved to be a mediocre president who was not good at getting his ideas implemented. The "American System" he and Clay championed went over poorly, and Adams lost reelection to Clay's nemesis, Andrew Jackson. Clay was elected to the Senate, and ran against Andrew Jackson in 1832. He actually thought he was winning because he was very popular on the campaign trail, packing crowds and winning much laughter and applause with his stump speeches, but when the votes came in, Jackson had crushed him.

Andrew Jackson had dumped his vice president, John C. Calhoun, so Calhoun returned to the Senate, and along with Daniel Webster, Clay and Calhoun became the "Great Triumvirate" who dominated the Senate for the next 18 years. During this period, Clay began to gain a reputation for engineering brilliant compromises — between the North and the South, between abolitionists and slave-owners, mostly — and won the title of the "Great Pacificator." Although he was well respected, his compromises actually tended to piss off both sides, while holding the Senate together — barely. He also became the de facto head of the newly-formed Whig party, which was an unsteady alliance of anti-Jacksonians that never really coalesced as a political party.

In the election of 1840, Clay sought the nomination of the Whig Party, and expected to win it, but ended up being backstabbed by the party bosses, who wanted someone more malleable than Clay in the White House. Clay nonetheless loyally supported President-elect Harrison, only for Harrison to die a month into office and be replaced by Vice President Tyler, who then turned on the Whigs.

On his fourth attempt at the Presidency, Clay ran against James K. Polk in 1844. Once again, he thought he had it in the bag, only to open the newspaper on election day and learn that Polk had narrowly defeated him.

Clay returned to the Senate, until failing health forced him to resign. His crowning achievement was the Compromise of 1850, which narrowly prevented a schism between North and South. Clay would die believing he'd saved the Union. During his last run for the presidency, "Clay Clubs" had sprung up all over the country, and one enthusiastic local chapter head was a young Illinois lawyer named Abraham Lincoln, who would later cite Clay frequently as inspiration for his own political ideals.

Like a lot of slave-owning statesmen, Clay spent a lot of time in his final years wrestling with the cognitive dissonance of owning slaves while knowing it was wrong. He had established the American Colonization Society, whose goal was to liberate slaves and send them back to Africa to found a free state. He advocated "gradual emancipation," and freed his slaves in his will.

Henry Clay might have been a great president. He'd probably at least have been a good one. Had he been elected, it's possible the Civil War might have been put off for a few more years, though it's unlikely that Clay's compromises would have prevented the inevitable split. Probably one of the most interesting "minor" players in American history I have read about, with the exception of Aaron Burr.

[Tim Martin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Concise, accessible, and moderately brief biography of “The Great Pacficator,” Henry Clay Sr. (1777-1852), one of the most important politicians and statesmen in the United States in the first half of the 19th century. Born in Virginia, he began first his legal career and not long after his political career in Lexington, Kentucky, going on to represent Kentucky in both the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives, serve as the speaker of the House, became a secretary of state, ran for president four times (three of those times receiving electoral votes, in 1824, 1832, and 1844), was a major figure in founding both the National Republican Party and the Whig Party, helped negotiate the Treaty of Ghent (bringing an end to the War of 1812), defended Aaron Burr in court in 1806, was instrumental several times in preventing civil war over slavery (a leading force behind the 1820 Missouri Compromise and later another Civil War averting measure, the Compromise of 1850 as well one I wasn’t familiar with, the nullification crisis over the Tariffs of 1828 and 1832), helped get John Quincy Adams elected in 1824 when the election went to the House of Representatives, and overall his input had an effect on many issues of the day from slavery to the Bank of the United States to tariffs to admitting Texas to the Union to infrastructure improvements like roads and canals in the United States. Along with the two other members of the “Great Triumvirate,” Daniel Webster and John C. Calhoun, he was one of the most important figures shaping the national debate and government policy from the 1800s to the early 1850s, with the author noting a number of times his influence (at a distance) on Abraham Lincoln.

Good overview of Clay’s life, the life of his family, especially his sons (a bit more than his daughters in my opinion). At times it was more overview of the wider sweep of American history during his lifetime, with the reader (or in this case listener) getting a lot of information on the debates over slavery or the admission of Texas for instance, though you do get a lot of the political history of Clay himself. I learned a lot about his relationship with Webster and with Calhoun, the latter a very complex relationship, about his interactions with Andrew Jackson (who looms large in the book), about why he ran for president so many times, and about why he was so passionate for his American System, his program for most especially federal infrastructure improvements (and why these improvements had such opposition). I learned about the very long shadow cast by his role in the 1824 presidential election, how he was key in getting John Quincy Adams elected but in accepting the post of secretary of state, was ever after accused by opponents of a “corrupt bargain,” something his political enemies never forgot and the accusations both affected his tenure as secretary of state and made him all too aware of potential future vulnerabilities of any more accusations of future “corrupt bargains.”

Some of the history, while interesting, was only tangential to the biography of Henry Clay, such as the particulars of the War of 1812, some of the weird quirks of John Quincy Adams, or the saga of Aaron Burr. As much as the “corrupt bargain” was a major event in Clay’s life, I think the author went too quickly past any discussion of over whether or not Clay did indeed make a corrupt bargain, my memory being that the author basically took Clay at his word.

I do think a great job was done on analyzing Clay’s complex views on slavery, how he was both opposed to slavery but also had slaves, how he was aware of and appreciative of the views of abolitionists but also tried to mollify proslavery factions largely out of an effort to save the Union, of how he viewed slavery as a cancer but then was all for sending freed slaves back to Africa, thinking that the best possible outcome. One can rightfully ask if the efforts to save the Union should have been saved if doing so allowed slavery to continue or at the very least, as Clay advocated later in life, a much more gradual end of slavery (though still with an outcome of former slaves being sent back to Africa), though the author does not in fact ask these questions.

I liked how early on how the author conveyed how different life was in America especially in Clay’s early adult years, such as the prevalence of dueling, calling different states “countries,” how people saw their allegiance far more to their state than to the United States so many times, how so many people viewed the United States as some sort of compact of equals and leaving was always an option, and how slavery evolved over time as the major political issue with just about every national political discussion at least somewhat touching on it, whether admitting Texas or the enactment of certain tariffs. Also, it was interesting to see how little role most voters had in picking the national government, with that really being the House of Representative and definitely not the Senate, with Clay’s tenure as speaker of the house a major force in shaping the role of that body and that position in American politics. It was also interesting to learn about how so much powerful the secretary of state once was, essentially occupying not only the role it has today but also the role of several other modern day cabinet positions in areas having nothing to do with diplomacy and foreign relations. There was also some interesting coverage early on in the book about frontier life in Kentucky and how difficult it was to travel across the country in the years before railroads.

Good writing, interesting subject, easy to listen to. I would have liked a bit more analysis of Clay’s thoughts and a bit more even coverage of his wife’s thoughts (though she is mentioned a lot) and in addition to coverage of his sons, a bit more coverage of his daughters. I do think anyone wanting to understand American history in the first half of the 19th century does need to know about Henry Clay.

[Rebecca · Rating 4 out of 5]

In my reading of biographies of US presidents, I felt I should include one on Henry Clay who had a Hillary Clinton like desire to be president but never quite made it even after four tries. So interesting to learn more about him. He probably would have been a good president in many ways. Henry Clay was on his way out as Abraham Lincoln was new to congress. Lincoln looked up to Henry Clay in many ways. It is interesting to look back on many of Lincoln's philosophies and realize he drew inspiration from Clay. At his inauguration Lincoln even quoted Clay. I appreciate the perspective on politics I get from reading these biographies and the combined picture they paint. We tend to think politics is much worse today. I'm not certain that is true at all, at the very least, members of congress no long duel each other. We can be thankful for that :).

[Jill · Rating 4 out of 5]

Henry Clay of Kentucky was elected to the post of Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives on November 4, 1811. The seventh Speaker in the nation’s history, he was the youngest man, and the only freshman ever to hold the office. The author calls him “the greatest Speaker of the House of Representatives in American history.”

Henry Clay is still known by many Americans today because of his influence on Abraham Lincoln, who said of Clay: “I worshiped him as a teacher and leader.” Indeed, Lincoln not only emulated Clay’s devotion to the idea of Union in theory, but also in its specifics: he tried to push through many of the programs advocated by Clay, including the “American System” - internal improvements consisting of a network of roads, bridges, and canals linking every state and territory. Clay thought such an investment not only made good economic sense; it would also help bind the nation together. Trade between different regions of the country, as well as the movement of populations among them would create interdependency, and help cement the disparate sectors into a true Union.

Unfortunately, the South was opposed to the American System proposal. As the author writes:

“By restricting the extent and ease of transportation, planters could keep blacks and poor whites in their thrall indefinitely. The American System threatened the future of slavery and the wealth of the southern oligarchy by opening the South to transportation, commerce, education, ideas, competition, and emancipation.”

It also would open the way to better escape routes for slaves.

It should be noted that Clay himself owned slaves, although he helped establish and became president in 1816 of the American Colonization Society, a group that wanted to establish a colony for free American blacks in Africa; it founded Monrovia, in what became Liberia, for that purpose. [Lincoln was similarly in favor throughout most of his life of colonization for slaves.] Clay decried slavery as “a great evil,” but thought that universal emancipation would produce “civil war, carnage, conflagration, devastation . . .” [He thought the war would be between the two races, rather than between the whites of the North and the South.]

Clay had the misfortune to have an implacable enemy in the form of the very powerful Andrew Jackson, who came to revile Clay for, inter alia, denying him (as Jackson saw it) his rightful prize as U.S. President in the election of 1824. With the vote split, Clay directed his supporters to vote for John Quincy Adams. When Adams won the election, Adams offered Clay the position of Secretary of State. Both men denied any quid pro quo, and indeed, Adams had plenty of reason to want Clay in this position in any event. But the Jackson forces took vicious aim at both men, calling the appointment a “corrupt bargain” that denied the office to the man who truly deserved it, i.e., Jackson. Jackson’s adherents never let the nation forget it, and Clay was thus repeatedly stymied in his own attempts to become U.S. President.

Nevertheless, Clay’s contributions to the nation were not minimal. Time after time he exercised his influence over Congress to forge compromises between the Northern and Southern factions, always in the name of Union. When he died, on July 29, 1852, the editor of the Washington D.C. newspaper “National Intelligencer” wrote: “He knew no North; he knew no South. He knew nothing but his country.”

Evaluation: This author, who is one of my favorite historians, doesn’t go into excessive depth in this biography, but gives us enough background of this admirable statesman to understand why Lincoln exclaimed upon learning of Clay’s death: “Alas! Who can realize that Henry Clay is dead! Who can realize, that the workings of that mighty mind have ceased . . . that freedom’s champion - the champion of a civilized world . . . has indeed fallen.”

Rating: 3.5/5

[Bill F.]

Henry Clay is one of the great statesmen in American history. It is not too broad a paint stroke to say that - without Clay - the Civil War would have been fought long before 1861 and well before the North would have had the strength to win it and preserve the Union. While Clay attempted to become President many different times, without success, he had more influence - save Lincoln - than any 19th century American president. Indeed, I've often felt that - had Clay won any of his attempts at the presidency - the Civil War would have started years before it did because Clay would not have been in Congress to keep the forces for disunion apart.

For me, the seminal text in Henry Clay historiography remains Robert Remini's 1992 biography, Henry Clay. The irony there is that Remini was a biographer of Clay's arch-nemesis, Andrew Jackson. After years of researching Jackson, however, Remini was enchanted by Clay and the result is a wonderful biography.

Harlow Giles Unger's Henry Clay: America's Greatest Statesman falls considerably short of Remini, but perhaps that is not fair - Remini set a pretty high bar. For those unfamiliar with Clay's story - and his story is the story of the first fifty-plus years of American post-Constitutional history - Unger's short biography does the job.

Before delving into the political, one of the lesser known aspects of Clay's life among the general public is the large number of great personal tragedies Clay suffered in his life. Six of his children died during his lifetime [Henrietta (1800-1801); Susan Hart (1805-1825); Anne Brown (1807-1835); Lucretia Hart (1809-1823); Henry Jr (1811-1847); and Eliza (1813-1825)]. In addition, in a two-week period in 1829, his mother, stepfather and brother all died. Because of the death of his children and many of their spouses, in the 1830s his wife, Lucretia, was often taking care of up to seven orphaned grandchildren at a time. For this reason, she never returned to Washington after the mid-1830s.

In terms of politics, Unger gets the thesis right when he notes, "Clay held the states together long enough for a new generation of Americans to emerge who embraced nationhood - and were willing to fight and die to preserve it."

Clay's major tool to keep the Union together was what came to be called the American System: a nation-spanning network of roads, bridges, and canals to link every state and territory with each other. The point of Clay's "American System" was to bind the United States politically, commercially and socially through a series of internal improvements [roadways, canals, etc.], the creation of universities, a tariff wall to protect American products, and using money from the sale of western lands to pay for those internal improvements.

After serving in the Kentucky legislature, Clay was elected to the U.S. House in 1811. Unger does an excellent job of capturing what the House looked like upon Clay's arrival: "Members walked in, out, and about at will, shouting to [or at] each other, shoving each other, oblivious to cries for order from the Speaker and appeals from colleagues to support legislative proposals. Unlike the dignified elite portrayed in history tomes and stately oil paintings, frontiersmen in buckskins chewed tobacco and shot spittle toward brass spittoons - sometimes hitting their mark."

Unger also accurately captures what Americans meant when they spoke of their "country" - they meant their state, not the U.S. As Unger notes, "Far from a single nation, the 'United' States were a loose association of semi-independent nations with few ties to hold them together..." Geography was also major impediment to fostering a sense of being one nation. As Unger notes, "In the best of weather Washington lay more than five days' travel from New York, ten days from Boston, and all but inaccessible from far-off Charleston, South Carolina."

Amazingly, Clay was immediately elected Speaker of the House upon his arrival on November 4, 1811 - the youngest man to ever hold that office and the only freshman congressman to ever do so.

Clay, John Calhoun and other young congressmen were largely responsible for providing the support - and, indeed, even the impetus - for U.S. entry into the War of 1812. Unger does a fine job of bringing to the fore one of the little known facts about that war: it needn't have happened. On June 23, 1812, the British Parliament voted to restore good relations with the U.S. by ending impressment of American sailors and other violations of international law about which America had long complained. But by then, the U.S. had already declared war. Unger explains that, once it became known in the U.S. that Parliament had yielded, "America's maritime and commercial states - Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey and Delaware - demanded that the federal government rescind its declaration of war and resume negotiations with the British..." But by that point the U.S. had suffered defeats on the battlefield that made it impractical to do so.

Clay resigned from Congress in 1814 to serve on the peace committee sent to Europe to negotiate an end to the war. The result of the war was status quo antebellum. It was a useless war, but as Unger notes, "...Americans - almost unanimously - deluded themselves into calling it a great victory."

One of the major problems with Unger's work is his treatment of slavery and African Americans. He often writes as if he is living in the 1950s. Throughout the book, he is an apologist for Clay's own slaveholding and for slavery in general - a truly incredible offering from an author in 2015. In discussing Clay's hypocrisy [a slaveholder who 'opposed' slavery], Unger actually writes: "Publicly [Clay] called slavery 'a deep stain upon the character of our country,' but privately he insisted that slaves were better off under his care than anywhere else - as indeed, they probably were [my italics]." That's right: Unger says the slaves were probably better off under Clay's ownership than anywhere else. He wrote that in 2015. Not 1815.

Another example of Unger's 19th century view of African Americans: "Unlike the North, the South had no towns or cities to absorb slaves in industries and apprenticeship programs. The South was agricultural. The road out of one plantation led only to the road into the next; unskilled slaves had no recourse but to work the land. Emancipation would leave untold thousands of unskilled men, women, and children without work, without homes, with no place to go or means of survival." Unger then has the audacity to call Clay's slaves "all deeply loyal" - as if they had a choice! Writing about Clay's work on his plantation after "retiring" from Congress in 1821, Unger says, "...Clay set slaves to work. A carpenter and painter restored the house and outbuildings while others worked on lawns and gardens - mowing, weeding, planting or transplanting dogwoods, hollies, and a small forest of flowering trees and ornamental shrubs....As [Clay] increased his crops, he doubled the number of slaves to about two dozen, buying some, selling others, leasing a few and trading less capable slaves for stronger or smarter ones." Again, Unger is writing for a 1950s audience. Indeed, many times in the book, rather than calling them "slaves" he calls them "workers" as in "...[Clay] threw himself into farm work, helping workers repair, renovate, and improve..."

Clay's retirement in 1821 - like most of them - was short-lived. His constituents returned him to the House in an election in August 1822 - where the House elected him Speaker again. Clay had tremendous success during this run. He was able to get President James Monroe to sign a major internal improvements bill and a high tariff. With that success, the Kentucky legislature nominated Clay for President in 1824. With no political parties at the time, six states chose nominees by legislature. In other states, voters chose electors committed to a particular candidate.

The outcomes and subsequent dealings in the campaign of 1824 would prove to be the end to any hope Clay had of ever becoming president, although he could not know it at the time. Rather than campaign, Clay spent most of the time at home in Kentucky. He believed that none of the candidates - himself, John Quincy Adams, William Crawford, and Andrew Jackson - would get a majority of electoral votes and that the tally would go before the House to decide. Based on his support in the House, he figured, he could secure the Presidency there.

Clay made a mistake. Not about the race going into the House, it did - with no one getting a majority of electoral votes. But the Constitution says that only the top three electoral vote-getters are to be considered and Clay finished fourth with only 37 electoral votes [compared to Jackson's 99, 84 for Adams and 41 for Crawford]. In the popular vote, there was no doubt: Jackson won 153,000 popular votes compared to 114,000 for Adams, and 47,000 each for Clay and Crawford.

In the House, each state would get one vote. Although out of the running, Clay was going to make a president based on his power in the House. Clay told his friend, Virginia Judge Francis T. Brooke, that Crawford's health [he'd had a paralyzing stroke] made him ineligible and as for Jackson, "I cannot consent to the election of a military chieftain." Clay told Francis Preston Blair, "I cannot believe that killing 2,500 Englishmen at New Orleans [in 1815] qualifies for the various, difficult, and complicated duties of the Chief Magistracy."

It would be Adams, then. In reality, there was never any other possible choice for Clay. There was no way that Clay was going to support Jackson - whom he loathed. Clay asked for a meeting with Adams on January 9, 1825. Clay told Adams that he would support him.

On January 24, 1825, Clay got the Kentucky House delegation to announce it would cast its vote for Adams even though Kentucky's legislature had given them express instructions to vote for Jackson [not to mention the fact that Adams had not won a single Kentucky electoral vote]. On February 9th Adams won in the House on the first ballot. Then, on February 14th, Adams named Clay Secretary of State, launching a firestorm that would follow Clay for the rest of his life. Years later, Clay admitted, "It would have been wiser and more politic to have declined the office of Secretary of State. Not that my motives were not as pure and as patriotic as ever carried any man into public office."

Here, Unger presents an interesting argument: despite common belief that Clay asked for the State Department in return for his support of Adams, Unger believes it was Adams who offered it and - most importantly - that Clay did not jump at the offer right away. Unger says that Clay knew that accepting the position could be political suicide, "but [Clay] believed that the only hope for establishing the American System and cementing the Union was as Secretary of State. Then the most powerful post after the presidency, the Secretary of State in the 1820s wielded powers variously held in the twenty-first century by the secretaries of. Interior, Agriculture, Commerce, Labor, Transportation, and Energy..." It was for the American System, Unger argues - as well as the fact that the State Department had launched the last three presidencies [James Madison, Monroe and Adams] - that Clay accepted Adams' offer.

Unger accurately points out, however, that, "Adams and Clay did not seem to understand that objections to the American System lay not in the proposal itself but in the cession of state powers to the federal government it required." Plus, "Federal highways and waterways, [opponents] feared, would open routes both for federal troops to march in and for slaves and poor whites to march out....The American System threatened the future of slavery and the wealth of the southern oligarchy by opening the South to transportation, commerce, education, ideas, competition, and emancipation."

The result was four miserable years for both Adams and Clay followed by a landslide victory for Jackson in 1828.

Kentucky sent Clay back to Washington in 1832, this time in the Senate, where he became Majority Leader. This after he was again nominated for President by the Republicans [soon to be the Whigs]. The corrupt bargain and Jackson's popularity gave the latter another landslide, winning 210 electoral votes to Clay's 49.

Despite another presidential loss, Clay once again stepped forward to prevent what could have been the start of the Civil War. South Carolina had threatened secession after 'nullifying' a tariff bill. To diffuse the crisis, Clay worked with John Calhoun to get a compromise. Clay proposed gradual changes in rates. The Clay-Calhoun plan would reduce tariffs on a handful of imports deemed essential to the southern economy but gradually reduce all other tariffs over a decade, until 1842, when they would drop to 20% They'd be high enough to offer some protection while keeping prices reasonable. As Unger notes, "The compromise offered a little to everyone without giving everything to anyone." On March 1, 1833, Clay's Compromise Tariff passed. In return, South Carolina repealed its ordinance of nullification.

Meanwhile, Jackson's ridiculous, childish and dangerous 'killing' of the Bank of the United States [BUS] created a national financial collapse. It provided Clay, Calhoun and Daniel Webster with the momentum to create the Whig Party in opposition. Clay brought into the Whig party a coalition: remnants of the Anti-Masons, Democrats opposed to Jackson's bank policy, northern and southern industrialists [who favored tariff protection] supporters of state sovereignty and Republicans who had supported Adams' and Clay's American System.

As the 1840 election neared, Clay - who had done more than anyone to preserve the Union - found that that willingness to compromise would cost him the nomination. As Unger notes, "New York State's Whig leaders [discounted Clay]....by citing political compromises as having turned [Clay] into a political liability as a presidential candidate. Although they agreed he had saved the Union, the benefits of every compromise have political costs, and voters often tend to remember the costs more than the benefits. Few Americans treasured Union as much as he." Indeed, Unger maintains that, "Neither southern slaveholders nor northern abolitionists, therefore, saw preservation of the Union as a reason to modify their political positions: indeed, many saw considerable advantages to North-South separation."

Indeed it is clear that Clay was one of the few leaders at the time who wanted reconciliation. In fact, Unger argues that some wanted dissolution of the Union, seeing it as the only peaceful resolution possible - the only way to avoid civil war. In writing about political leaders of the time, Unger notes, "Far from seeking national reconciliation and unity, [Thurlow] Weed, [William] Seward and [John] Tyler saw disunion and separation of North and South as a peaceful solution to the national conflict over slavery and state sovereignty. All three considered Clay a political liability, given his efforts to reconcile the two regions." They were not the only ones. Pennsylvania's Thaddeus Stevens was equally determined to block Clay's nomination. "With most Americans blaming [President] Van Buren for the economic collapse [of 1837], the Whigs believed victory a certainty, and the Stevens-Weed bloc wanted a man in the White House whom they could control - they knew no one could 'control' Clay but Clay." Thus William Henry Harrison was their choice, and he took the nomination from Clay, winning the White House over Van Buren in November 1840.

Harrison's death only a month into office left Tyler as President. He refused to bend to Whig leaders, who drummed him out of the party. Again, Clay would run for President. In February 1842, he resigned from the Senate to begin his presidential campaign. Clay went on a cross-country tour to promote the American System and his candidacy. Unger argues that part of the campaign was designed to, "expose emancipation as far more complex than" most imagined. Well received, Unger argues that nonetheless, "Clay evidently misinterpreted the good will of his audiences, however." While they respected and admired him, and while they enjoyed the pageantry of his visit, it didn't mean they were going to vote for him.

And, indeed, more didn't than did. The turnout for the 1844 election was an incredible 79% of eligible voters. James K. Polk won 1,339,494 popular votes and 170 electoral votes [15 states]; Clay won 1,300,004 popular votes, and 105 electoral votes [11 states]; while James Birney's single-issue [abolition] Liberty Party won 62,054 and - according to Unger - cost Clay the election. Unger argues convincingly that Birney's votes were, "almost entirely ultra-abolitionist - who cost Clay victories in New York and Pennsylvania, key states that would have earned [Clay] the presidency."

Polk's presidency saw the Mexican-American War and a strong expansion of American territory. Indeed, had he not committed himself to a single-term when first elected, it is most likely that Polk would have easily been reelected in 1848. Amazingly, even after all of the defeats, Clay remained the favored [and assumed] nominee for the Whigs in 1848. Even though by now Clay had finally accurately sensed the mood of the country and it's aversion to reconciliation, he couldn't help himself. At this point, it was not personal ambition so much as a belief that he and he alone could save the Union and he could only do so from the White House.

And yet...the Whigs would not allow it. As Unger writes of the Whigs, "Although Henry Clay had been able to unite them against Jackson, Van Buren, and Tyler, he had never been able to unite enough of them for Henry Clay." At the convention, Whigs again turned to a military hero - this time Zachary Taylor. Despite pleas from supporters, Clay refused to run as an independent. Taylor went on to win the presidency.

The Kentucky legislature again returned Clay to the Senate in 1849. It would be there - in 1850 - that Clay would present his final compromise, this time on the issue of California and the expansion of slavery. Clay presented his compromise in five resolution on January 29, 1850: 1) California would enter the Union as a free state; 2) Utah and New Mexico would enter as territories [not states]; settlers there would eventually determine whether slavery was to be permitted; 3) Abolished the slave trade in the District of Columbia; 4) Tightening of the Fugitive Slave Act; 5) Texas to abandon claims to territory in New Mexico in exchange for $10 million. Although supported by many, President Taylor was inclined to veto the bill if it reached him. He never got the chance. He died on July 9, 1850, after a short - and some still say 'mysterious' - illness. With Taylor dead, it fell to new President Millard Fillmore, who eagerly signed the bill that became known as the Compromise of 1850. With it, Unger writes, "Clay - and the nation - believed he had fulfilled his dreams of saving the Union without civil war."

Henry Clay died on June 29, 1852, "believing he had saved the Union," as Unger notes. Of course, we know that it simply delayed by eleven years what had long been inevitable. Yet that delay was crucial to the eventual Union victory. Such an event was possible in 1865. It would not have been possible in 1821, 1833, 1844, or 1850. The time that Henry Clay "bought" was crucial. Although his version of the Union differed considerably from ours - specifically in regard to African Americans - we nonetheless owe Clay a great debt of gratitude. He once said, "I would rather be right than be President."

That was, perhaps, his greatest compromise.

[Christopher · Rating 3 out of 5]

America's first perennial Presidential bridesmaid.

Unger's 2015 biography of Henry Clay is a competent, if oddly paced, work. It does a fine job of rounding out Clay as more than merely a political figure (though that's what he ultimately was) and instead gives the reader a decent look into his hard drinking and hard gambling habits while in Congress. We also get a real sense of his tragic family life as one by one, nearly all of his 11 children die early or are otherwise incapacitated (including contentment to a lunatic asylum).

When it comes to describing Clay's political career, Unger veers into the hagiographic more frequently than he should, casting every position by Clay as the noble one. This is forgivable in his various negotiated compromises to resolve the slavery question and preserve the union and his favoring colonization vice immediate abolition. But Unger also puts Clay in the right in his "corrupt bargain" of 1824 that gave John Quincy Adams the presidency over Andrew Jackson despite the latter having more popular and electoral votes (though not enough to win, thus sending it to the House where Clay, as Speaker, helped give the election to Adams.

Clay's subsequent acceptance of the Secretary of State post under Adams (the traditional stepping stone to the presidency) only highlighted the rather obvious shady nature of the arrangement. While clearly motivated by a hatred/ fear of Jackson and desire for power, Unger, however, gives far too much credence to Clay's disclaimers on this usurpation. (Clay's 4 failed presidential runs are a clue the guy might wanna be president)

The Clay/Jackson feud could have been fertile grounds for an extended treatment, but Unger, in this and many other sections, "fast forwards" and we're often several years ahead with little sense of place (he almost totally ignores the Mexican American War, for example).

Nevertheless, this is an enjoyable, if sometimes too credulous a bio of one of America's most influential statesmen.

[Beverlee Jobrack · Rating 4 out of 5]

A detour from my journey through the biographies of American presidents. I knew so little about Henry Clay but knew he was incredibly influential and so well qualified, the first to lie in state in the Capitol when he died. He served 40 years in the House and Senate and ran for president unsuccessfully three times. He was a major influence on Abraham Lincoln. He was antislavery but owned slaves, but he famously promoted an abolitionist position, which cost him. "I'd rather be right than President." He was staunchly supportive of keeping the union together. I always wonder how things would be different if Presidential elections were decided differently. We'll never know what could have happened.

[Penelope · Rating 5 out of 5]

I got this book because I admire Lincoln and Lincoln admired Clay. Excellent book, well written, in depth look at a great statesman. I listened to the audiobook and really liked John Lescault's narration. It's a book I will need to go through again it's so full of information.

[Michael Muirhead · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting read and my first book on Henry Clay. In most of the historical documentaries I have watched and even in the history lessons I was taught in school Henry Clay, in my opinion, is under appreciated and represented for the life’s work he gave in service for the US.

I will end my review with saying it is heartbreaking reading/listening to how common it was for a man’s children to precede him in death especially in the 19th century in which Clay lived. His story is one of devotion to his country as well as Greek tragedy for all the hopes lost in burying so many of his children before his own passing.

[Andrew · Rating 5 out of 5]

Glad to read this biography by Harlow Giles Unger. For years, I thought I would not have been associated with Whigs during this period. I think the Whigs represented more of the common man than I realized. Still against the Central Banks and debt driven expansion. Nonetheless, Henry Clay was first a Westerner, a slave owner, a common man before he was a Whig. And the Whigs built mostly off their hatred for Andrew Jackson, but they could not come together on anything else.

"The Great Pacifier", the "Sage from Ashland", "The Great Compromiser" was a true Statesman to America. His service from the War of 1812 - a 'warhawk' in those days - to the Compromise of 1850 increased the power of congress, introduced the 'American System', . There are many good things about the American System such as internal improvements of roads and canals to bolster the economy. It was simply a time when big government was feared and the other side did not believe the Federal government to have this power.

Politically his greatest achievements were the The Missouri Compromise of 1820 and the Compromise of 1850. His ability to bring people together in a country were division ran deep is of his greatest attribute. Admitting Missouri as a slave stage and Maine as a free state maintained the balance of power in Congress and held for thirty years.

His years as a congressman and senator were shared with Daniel Webster and John C. Calhoun, the "Great Triumvirate". This period is a fascinating period in America. There was alot that went on and I think the more important things happened outside of the Executive Branch. Clay should have been president if for one, his success as a Statesman. I compare him to John Quincy Adams. His best chance looked like 1844 where he was nominated unanimously for Whig. The Democrats finagled James Polk for their nomination, the country wanted Texas. Once Clay (and Van Buren) denounced annexing Texas, it became their demise, and Van Buren ticket probably cost Clay in NY where the election was lost. Though he tried again in 1848, Zachary Taylor was too popular. And who cares about a man with no previous civil service?

Henry Clay is intertwined in some of America's greatest historical events and was viewed that way. He also endured the hardships of life like everyone back then. He and Lucretia lost a number of children and grandchildren. I think the hardest one was his namesake son who died in the Battle of Buena Vista in the Mexican-American War, a war which Clay feared would happen if Texas was annexed.

Clay died just after the Compromise of 1850, believing he saved the Union. Whatever I thought of this man before, I leave with respect to his lifelong goal to save the union. Holding a piece of wood from Washington's casket before the Senate had to be very strong.

[Socraticgadfly · Rating 1 out of 5]

How many errors can you pack into 55 pages?

A lot, seemingly. Because that's when I stopped reading.

The biggest? Unger claims that, despite Clay having slaves before marriage and getting yet more as part of his wife's dowry, he was antislavery. Oh, maybe he was in the abstract, but really? Clay actually legally fought against a slave of his who claimed that a promise by a former owner meant she should be free. Also note the "former owner" part; Clay was buying slaves through much of his adult life.

That's followed by Unger claiming the Louisiana Purchase was unconstitutional.

Total rot.

Besides the main fact on the ground of the Senate passing the treaty, the John Marshall Supreme Court, having already established judicial review in the case of Marbury v Madison, obviously declined to review the treaty.

Elsewhere in these brief pages, Unger claims Clay lost four presidential contests. Wrong. It was three. A failed big for the Whig nomination in 1840 isn't counted by professional historians. And, there's more. I'm just listing the worst.

Davd Heidler's book is a real read. Not this.

As for the title of this one? It's arguably true, depending on how one defines "statesman."

Don't think I'll be reading other books by Unger.

[Diana Long · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well written unbiased biography of an important figure in the history of the United States. Passionate then as now in politics Henry Clay as Speaker of the House had his hands full in controlling the tempers of the many personalities of the men who entered into public service. Of course we have come a long way in the rules of civility, one would not expect a representative to beat another with his cane or in the heat of debates to draw guns on each other. I learned a great deal about Henry Clay as well as the time he lived in. He would not live to see the war that finally came to divide a nation, nor the many states we have today. Nor would he have to choose which son to follow as his family would divide just as the still young county he loved and served. For anyone interested in American History I would highly recommend this biography.

[Tom Schulte · Rating 4 out of 5]

Audible Audio edition, narrated by John Lescault as credited on the image on this entry.

It was very engaging to read about this successful American statesman who became successful and famous so young while fighting for the cause of union even if compromise in the prelude years to the Civil War. He was certainly a harbinger of Lincoln's views.

Also, somewhere along the way, I came across a quote about modern, first-world distractions like social and streaming media being only satisfactions of the desire that they themselves create. So, I was surprised to read here from a letter by a friend of Clay's wife Lucretia during the upsetting presidential victory of Andrew Jackson:

Unlike Clay, John Quincy Adams abandoned his dreams and planned to return to his father’s farm in Quincy, Massachusetts, to practice law in nearby Boston the rest of his days.

On March 4, 1829, Andrew Jackson was inaugurated as seventh President of the United States. John Quincy Adams, as his father had done after Jefferson’s election victory, refused to attend the inauguration or the new President’s White House reception.

"I can yet scarcely realize my situation," Adams shuddered in disbelief, saying that "posterity will scarcely believe . . . the combination of parties and of public men against my character and reputation such as I believe never before was exhibited against any man since this Union existed.

The combination against me has been formed and is now exulting in triumph over me, for the devotion of my life and of all the faculties of my soul to the Union and to the improvement, physical, moral and intellectual, of my country. The North assails me for my fidelity to the Union; the South for my ardent aspirations of improvement. Yet . . . the cause of Union and of improvement will remain, and I have duties to it and to my country yet to discharge.

The words could well have been Clay’s.

"The drama of the Adams administration is now closed," Mrs. Smith wrote to her daughter,

"the curtain dropped, a kind of tragic comedy. . . .

As soon as possible, they will take their departure. . . . Rank, honors, glory are such unsubstantial, empty things that they can never satisfy the desires that they create. . . . Men have expended health of body and peace of mind, a large portion of their lives . . . watched and worked, toiled and struggled, sacrificed friends and fortune—and gained what? Nothing that I can perceive but mortification and disappointment. . . . Every one of the men who will retire from office . . . will return to private lives with blasted hopes, injured health, impaired or ruined fortunes . . . and probably a total inability to enjoy the remnant of their lives.

"Not so Mr. Clay!" Mrs. Smith added with a flourish. "He is a very great man. . . . His late defeat—far from being disheartening—it has been positive in its effects."21 The campaign had freed Clay from political encumbrances, she said—"like the lion breaking the net in which he had been entangled."

Margaret Bayard Smith, wife of National Intelligencer editor/publisher Samuel Harrison Smith. Mrs. Smith chronicled Washington social life for the first forty years of the nineteenth century, listening to every word in every drawing room—and many bedrooms. If she didn’t see or hear it, it probably never happened. This quote of hers about "empty things that they can never satisfy the desires that they create" can still be read in digitized collections of that serial publication.

[Bill Christman · Rating 4 out of 5]

Henry Clay's national political career started with advocating war with Britain and leading Congress to start the War of 1812. While Unger doesn't mention it it seems that war's inconclusive outcome and the poor showing of the United States inspired Henry Clay to connect America. It is perhaps the infrastructure, called American System, where he hoped to create connections and help unite the country further. It must have been frustrating for Clay to see his vision die. Most of his plan would not become federal government policy until Abraham Lincoln became President. While guiding the country in the Civil War an unappreciated side of the Lincoln years was he support for what we now call infrastructure. Clay, Lincoln's inspiration, felt that faster transportation would benefit the entire country.

Henry Clay was a nationalist. He believed in the Union. His problem was that being such a national figure his enemies, mostly southerners, would use his personality and claims that Clay wanted to to do harm to the south, to defeat most of his desired legislative agenda. This left Clay as a crisis manager and perhaps the one politician who most understood the issues of his time. His moderation in an era of growing radicalism became suspect in the eyes of his contemporaries. Clay's understand of the issues, Unger shows clearly, in a campaign stop to an abolitionist stronghold, where his speech discussed all the problems that would arise over freeing the slaves. This speech made in the early 1840s completely foresaw what reconstruction was going to have to deal with. Clay's understanding of the issue quieted his critics in this case and earned him respect. Not enough respect to ever be President, in one election probably because of the inflated electoral votes the south had cost him the office.

Henry Clay was the most pivotal American statesman in the first half of the 1800s. His personality brought people together and he was able to create compromises that, while not making anyone happy, made all sides content. In hindsight the sheer size of the country and the south made a civil war before 1860 likely to leave at least two nations instead of one. The infrastructure and technology that Clay was a fan of would become the tools of the south's destruction.

This book gives nice insight to Henry Clay and is a good beginner biography of the statesman. I have not read much more about the man but intend to as the angle Unger took of Clay through Lincoln makes one want to learn more about this man.

[David Williams · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an excellent biography of one of the great figures of American political history. For forty-six years Clay served the people of Kentucky and the people of the United States of America. He served as a Senator, a Congressman, and Secretary of State. In his time he made powerful enemies such as the formidable Andrew Jackson. He also made friends such as Daniel Webster and John C. Calhoun. Though Clay would eventually break with both over policy issues these three men would dominate the Senate for many years.

Harlow Giles Unger has given us a well written introduction to both Clay and the era. With any biography of an important person there will always be something that they readers wants to know more about. The relationship between Clay, Webster, and Calhoun is touched on, but there is so much more to learn. Most of all I wished that the book had taken a deeper look into Clay's views and actions on slavery. Unger mentions that Clay disliked slavery. Yet Clay owned slaves. He also mentioned that Clay often freed his own slaves. Then he would purchase more. This struck me as curious and I wished that I knew more.

All in all this is a very readable book. You do not need to have a knowledge of the time period, but it does help. I recommend this book to everyone with an interest in this fascinating and important period of American History.

[Carissa · Rating 5 out of 5]

Henry Clay was born during the Revolutionary War and died nine years before the Civil War. I knew almost nothing about him prior to this book and very little about the period of the early Republic. He was a fascinating individual whose life was entwined with the most consequential men of his age - John Quincy Adams, Andrew Jackson, Daniel Webster, John Calhoun, and others. Although the issue of slavery was ever-present during Clay’s life (and he himself embodied the contradictions of many statesmen of the time), it was not the only issue. His “American System” and dedication to forming a nation out of disparate states was very important to the development of our country. The author fell in love a bit too much with his subject, I think, but he at least made a serious effort to understand Clay in the context of his time. I highly recommend this book to learn about the early history of America, efforts to avoid civil war (which wound up only buying time), and a dedicated statesman.

[Matt Deets · Rating 4 out of 5]

Unger always delivers and "Henry Clay, America's greatest statesman" is no different. Is it the most complete work available in regards to Clay? No but for someone wanting an entertaining concise view into his life and work it is a great place to start. Without Henry Clay (who by no means was abolitionist) the union would have fallen into civil war decades before it did and decades before a leader as strong as Lincoln was to lead us out of it. Unger gives a vivid look into the North/South divisions that boiled for years prior to erupting into civil war. While the book has a clear Clay bias and Jackson/Tyler/Polk anti-bias(in my opinion rightfully so) it still paints a solid picture of some of the more tumultuous times in our countries history.

[Leah · Rating 5 out of 5]

I didn't grow up in America, so I have a broad outline of American history. It is always a pleasure to be able to dig deeper. Which this book did. Aside from Henry Clay himself being a fascinating man, I was enthralled with the history itself. People today talk about the end of America as we know it. Well, America is always changing. The rancor, the actual physical fights and duels! Years ago I read Gore Vidal book about Aaron Burr, I'll be honest, I didn't understand what was going on - but I was appalled by the duel with Alexander Hamilton - to my mind that was in itself against the law - turns out it wasn't - it was very common place.
Clay being the great compromiser has given us so much of America as we know it today, and I thank him for that - both the good and the bad

[Literary Chic · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good biography of another great Kentuckian. I was torn between 3 or 4 stars. The information is good and well researched but the writing is s little dry. This was my first Henry Clay biography so I was eager to hear anything, but I could see where a more knowledgeable reader of the Jacksonian era wouldn't appreciate this biography. I don't believe it goes into much depth and definitely skims over some very important parts of Clay's political life.

[Tom Rowe · Rating 3 out of 5]

Harlow Giles Unger always provides succinct factual biographies that lay out he basics. His no frills biography focuses on his subject with little in the way of information about the supporting characters. And while you don't really get to know his subjects, by the end, you know what they have done. This book on Henry Clay follows that form. It was OK. I can't say that I recommend or don't recommend unless you are specifically looking for this type of book.

[LAMONT D · Rating 4 out of 5]

I LIKE THE CONSTANT REFERENCES TO LETTERS, SPEECHES AND THE CONTEXT OF THOSE WORDS THROUGHOUT THE BOOK; YOU LEARN SO MUCH ABOUT THE GREAT AMERICAN STATESMAN; HIS TRAITS, HIS ACTIONS MANY TIMES QUESTIONABLE AT BEST, AND HOW OTHERS SAW HIM AND AT THE END OF HIS LIFE CELEBRATED WHAT HE MEANT TO THE NATION GOING THRU THE PRE-CIVIL WAR TRIALS AND TRIBULATIONS.

[Clayton Turner · Rating 3 out of 5]

""I worshipped him as a teacher and leader, ideal statesmen and the man for whom I fought all my humble life," Abraham Lincoln declared. "I recognize his voice speaking as it ever spoke for the union, the constitution and the freedom of mankind."" ~Harlow Giles Unger, Henry Clay: America's Greatest Statesman and Lincoln's Guiding Light

[Mel Hansen · Rating 4 out of 5]

I now know a little bit more about the man. I would recommend this book to anyone.

Politics/Politicians has been nasty, mean spirited and corrupt from word go. Occasionally there are a few men/women who defy the odds, the enchantment and riches of political power, and actually do some good. I believe Clay to be one of the the few.

One thing I found interesting in this book is how important and lucrative the growing and production of Hemp was. It should be the same today.

[Micah · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a profoundly mediocre biography.

It's of the "walk you through the person's life and go over the highlights without any real analysis" variety. There were entire swathes of the book that were more-or-less plagiarized (almost word for word) from his book on John Quincy Adams.

It's okay, it just ain't good.

[Matthew S. · Rating 3 out of 5]

A brief biography of Henry Clay. The author really only briefly examines the major events Clay participated in. If you are looking for an introduction to Clay then this book would be for you. If you are looking for a detailed, in depth look, then this is not what you’d want. There are also minor factual errors in the book, but nothing that detracts from the narrative. Overall, 3 stars.

[Cal McCormick · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very approachable biography that focuses more on the issues and politics of the day versus biographies that focus on laying out people’s lives in every minute detail.

There are more in-depth books available, but this is a smaller, I think better way to get an idea about a great man and the world around him

[Victor N · Rating 2 out of 5]

I really don’t know if my interest in Henry Clay is lacking or if the writing was not my style. I certainly struggled through Unger’s biography of John Marshall as well, but that seemed more clear and vibrant.

I may revisit Clay in the future, by a different author.