What do you think?
Rate this book
Lincoln's Last Trial: The Murder Case That Propelled Him to the Presidency
Goodreads Choice Award
Nominee for Readers' Favorite History & Biography (2018)Look for Dan Abrams and David Fisher’s new book, Kennedy’s Assassination, Conspiracy, and the Forgotten Trial of Jack Ruby .
Instant New York Times bestseller!
A Winner of the Barondess/Lincoln Award
A Washington Independent Review of Books Favorite Book of 2018
A Suspense Magazine Best Book of 2018
A Mental Floss Best Book of 2018
A USA Today Top 10 Hot Book for Summer
“Makes you feel as if you are watching a live camera riveted on a courtroom more than 150 years ago.” —Diane Sawyer
The true story of Abraham Lincoln’s last murder trial, a case in which he had a deep personal involvement—and which played out in the nation’s newspapers as he began his presidential campaign
At the end of the summer of 1859, twenty-two-year-old Peachy Quinn Harrison went on trial for murder in Springfield, Illinois. Abraham Lincoln, who had been involved in more than three thousand cases—including more than twenty-five murder trials—during his two-decades-long career, was hired to defend him. This was to be his last great case as a lawyer.
What normally would have been a local case took on momentous meaning. Lincoln’s debates with Senator Stephen Douglas the previous fall had gained him a national following, transforming the little-known, self-taught lawyer into a respected politician. He was being urged to make a dark-horse run for the presidency in 1860. Taking this case involved great risk. His reputation was untarnished, but should he lose this trial, should Harrison be convicted of murder, the spotlight now focused so brightly on him might be dimmed. He had won his most recent murder trial with a daring and dramatic maneuver that had become a local legend, but another had ended with his client dangling from the end of a rope.
The case posed painful personal challenges for Lincoln. The murder victim had trained for the law in his office, and Lincoln had been his friend and his mentor. His accused killer, the young man Lincoln would defend, was the son of a close friend and loyal supporter. And to win this trial he would have to form an unholy allegiance with a longtime enemy, a revivalist preacher he had twice run against for political office—and who had bitterly slandered Lincoln as an “infidel…too lacking in faith” to be elected.
Lincoln’s Last Trial captures the presidential hopeful’s dramatic courtroom confrontations in vivid detail as he fights for his client—but also for his own blossoming political future. It is a moment in history that shines a light on our legal system, as in this case Lincoln fought a legal battle that remains incredibly relevant today.
Look for Dan Abrams and David Fisher’s latest book, Theodore Roosevelt for the Defense , coming in May 2019.
Instant New York Times bestseller!
A Winner of the Barondess/Lincoln Award
A Washington Independent Review of Books Favorite Book of 2018
A Suspense Magazine Best Book of 2018
A Mental Floss Best Book of 2018
A USA Today Top 10 Hot Book for Summer
“Makes you feel as if you are watching a live camera riveted on a courtroom more than 150 years ago.” —Diane Sawyer
The true story of Abraham Lincoln’s last murder trial, a case in which he had a deep personal involvement—and which played out in the nation’s newspapers as he began his presidential campaign
At the end of the summer of 1859, twenty-two-year-old Peachy Quinn Harrison went on trial for murder in Springfield, Illinois. Abraham Lincoln, who had been involved in more than three thousand cases—including more than twenty-five murder trials—during his two-decades-long career, was hired to defend him. This was to be his last great case as a lawyer.
What normally would have been a local case took on momentous meaning. Lincoln’s debates with Senator Stephen Douglas the previous fall had gained him a national following, transforming the little-known, self-taught lawyer into a respected politician. He was being urged to make a dark-horse run for the presidency in 1860. Taking this case involved great risk. His reputation was untarnished, but should he lose this trial, should Harrison be convicted of murder, the spotlight now focused so brightly on him might be dimmed. He had won his most recent murder trial with a daring and dramatic maneuver that had become a local legend, but another had ended with his client dangling from the end of a rope.
The case posed painful personal challenges for Lincoln. The murder victim had trained for the law in his office, and Lincoln had been his friend and his mentor. His accused killer, the young man Lincoln would defend, was the son of a close friend and loyal supporter. And to win this trial he would have to form an unholy allegiance with a longtime enemy, a revivalist preacher he had twice run against for political office—and who had bitterly slandered Lincoln as an “infidel…too lacking in faith” to be elected.
Lincoln’s Last Trial captures the presidential hopeful’s dramatic courtroom confrontations in vivid detail as he fights for his client—but also for his own blossoming political future. It is a moment in history that shines a light on our legal system, as in this case Lincoln fought a legal battle that remains incredibly relevant today.
Look for Dan Abrams and David Fisher’s latest book, Theodore Roosevelt for the Defense , coming in May 2019.
320 pages, Paperback
First published June 5, 2018
2485 people are currently reading
9914 people want to read
About the author
David Fisher
350 books50 followersLibrarian note:
There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name
This profile may contain books from multiple authors of this name
There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name
This profile may contain books from multiple authors of this name
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 759 reviews
July 7, 2018
The 2 star rating is more of an average than anything.
This book deserves at least 4.5 stars for presenting a legal case that is interesting enough on its own, let alone because it includes insights into Abraham Lincoln pre-presidency. I was quickly caught up in the case and kept reading out of a real desire to know how it would end. The authors balance the account of the trial with interesting asides about the history of the U.S. legal system, simultaneously revealing the characters of the people involved, famous and not so famous.
Unfortunately, in their quest to make the book engaging, Abrams and Fisher's narrative choices undermined my ability to believe most of what was being presented as fact and were a constant distraction from the story being told. The book was inspired by the discovery of the transcript of the trial, which is quoted extensively in the text. The authors note in the introduction that the transcript material was supplemented by research and material in books, newspapers and other sources related to the trial, events of the time period, and the main protagonists. They also note that "there were times when we had to deduce what was said in meetings or private conversations or suggest appropriate thoughts and/or mannerisms." It is this last point which brings the rating down to 2 stars.
I spent most of the book confused as to what was fact and what was "deduced". While it was easy to identify what came from the transcript, the reader is left on their own to figure out which of the quotes and descriptions were drawn from other secondary sources and which ones are the product of Abrams and Fisher's "deductions". No notes are provided and the bibliography is rather thin. As a result I was forced to constantly shift between reading this book as a work of non-fiction and as a work of fiction, which was exhausting and irritating by the end.
Overall, I found it very hard to take this book seriously as a work of non-fiction and wish that the authors had picked one or the other (fiction or non-fiction) and stuck with it. Their attempt to walk the middle ground requires far too much guesswork for the reader and was a constant distraction from what is otherwise a fascinating story.
This book deserves at least 4.5 stars for presenting a legal case that is interesting enough on its own, let alone because it includes insights into Abraham Lincoln pre-presidency. I was quickly caught up in the case and kept reading out of a real desire to know how it would end. The authors balance the account of the trial with interesting asides about the history of the U.S. legal system, simultaneously revealing the characters of the people involved, famous and not so famous.
Unfortunately, in their quest to make the book engaging, Abrams and Fisher's narrative choices undermined my ability to believe most of what was being presented as fact and were a constant distraction from the story being told. The book was inspired by the discovery of the transcript of the trial, which is quoted extensively in the text. The authors note in the introduction that the transcript material was supplemented by research and material in books, newspapers and other sources related to the trial, events of the time period, and the main protagonists. They also note that "there were times when we had to deduce what was said in meetings or private conversations or suggest appropriate thoughts and/or mannerisms." It is this last point which brings the rating down to 2 stars.
I spent most of the book confused as to what was fact and what was "deduced". While it was easy to identify what came from the transcript, the reader is left on their own to figure out which of the quotes and descriptions were drawn from other secondary sources and which ones are the product of Abrams and Fisher's "deductions". No notes are provided and the bibliography is rather thin. As a result I was forced to constantly shift between reading this book as a work of non-fiction and as a work of fiction, which was exhausting and irritating by the end.
Overall, I found it very hard to take this book seriously as a work of non-fiction and wish that the authors had picked one or the other (fiction or non-fiction) and stuck with it. Their attempt to walk the middle ground requires far too much guesswork for the reader and was a constant distraction from what is otherwise a fascinating story.
June 20, 2018
"Talk to the jury as though your client's fate depends on every word you utter. Forget that you have any one to fall back upon, and you will do justice to yourself and your client."
- Abraham Lincoln
There are many levels of biography and history. There are academic books, published by small academic presses. There are popular biographies, written by journalists, etc., that tend to follow a more narrative-style. Obviously, Dan Abram's short history of Abraham Lincoln's last murder trial fits the last category. The "author" Dan Abrams is ABC's chief legal affairs anchor for ABC. Normally, this isn't a book I would have gravitated towards, except for two things: 1) I love Lincoln, and typically read a couple Lincoln books a year. 2) This book's ghost writer (yes Virginia, many books "written by celebrities/politicos/athletes are actually penned by a ghostwriter) is a good friend of mine. I've known David Fisher for years. I've stayed with him and his lovely wife on Fire Island, eaten with them a couple times in Manhatten and Riverdale and enjoyed David's perspective on politics, writing, and reading for years. Anyway, a couple months ago we had dinner at an Upper-Westside restaurant and his wife gave me her well-loved ARC of this book. I'm constantly amazed at how fast and how well Dave writes*. Plus, my kids adore him.
The highlight of this book, and what sets David's work apart from other Lincoln biographies, was his use of Robert Roberts Hitt's transcript of the Peachy Quinn Harrison murder trial. Hitt was a character himself (and one I knew nothing about previously) and was influential in the development of transcription. I also enjoyed how the book explored the development of the American legal system during the pre-Civil War period. A lot of the legal precedents, values, and practices we take for granted now were being hammered out in frontier courts and circuits all across America. Finally, it was fascinating to learn how far each of the lawyers (and the judge) associated with this trial went. It seemed almost like America in the 1850s and 1860s was a place where someone with exceptonal talent could easily rise to the national stage. Just look at Lincoln.
* Dave has written over 20 New York Times bestsellers.
- Abraham Lincoln
There are many levels of biography and history. There are academic books, published by small academic presses. There are popular biographies, written by journalists, etc., that tend to follow a more narrative-style. Obviously, Dan Abram's short history of Abraham Lincoln's last murder trial fits the last category. The "author" Dan Abrams is ABC's chief legal affairs anchor for ABC. Normally, this isn't a book I would have gravitated towards, except for two things: 1) I love Lincoln, and typically read a couple Lincoln books a year. 2) This book's ghost writer (yes Virginia, many books "written by celebrities/politicos/athletes are actually penned by a ghostwriter) is a good friend of mine. I've known David Fisher for years. I've stayed with him and his lovely wife on Fire Island, eaten with them a couple times in Manhatten and Riverdale and enjoyed David's perspective on politics, writing, and reading for years. Anyway, a couple months ago we had dinner at an Upper-Westside restaurant and his wife gave me her well-loved ARC of this book. I'm constantly amazed at how fast and how well Dave writes*. Plus, my kids adore him.
The highlight of this book, and what sets David's work apart from other Lincoln biographies, was his use of Robert Roberts Hitt's transcript of the Peachy Quinn Harrison murder trial. Hitt was a character himself (and one I knew nothing about previously) and was influential in the development of transcription. I also enjoyed how the book explored the development of the American legal system during the pre-Civil War period. A lot of the legal precedents, values, and practices we take for granted now were being hammered out in frontier courts and circuits all across America. Finally, it was fascinating to learn how far each of the lawyers (and the judge) associated with this trial went. It seemed almost like America in the 1850s and 1860s was a place where someone with exceptonal talent could easily rise to the national stage. Just look at Lincoln.
* Dave has written over 20 New York Times bestsellers.
April 26, 2019
This book covers the famous 1859 murder trial in Springfield, Illinois. Abraham Lincoln defended “Peachy” Quinn Harrison. Apparently, Harrison slashed Greek Crafton with a knife when Crafton and his friends attacked Harrison. Crafton dies of the wound and Harrison is accused of murder. He pleads self-defense. The trial recorder was Robert R. Hill, one of early short-hand trial stenographers. The book is taken directly from the trial transcript. Great courtroom drama. Lincoln was a well-known attorney in Springfield. The town’s people attended most of the trials as a form of entertainment.
Abrams, beside cover the trial, also provides some history of the legal system of the 1800s. I think the author’s claim that this trial propelled Lincoln into the presidency is mistaken. The only claim one could make is that it was Lincoln’s last trial before declaring his campaign for the presidency. If you are a history buff or are interested in the history of law, you will find this book interesting. Dan Abrams is the legal affairs anchor for ABC News.
I read this as an audiobook downloaded from Audible. The book is eight hours and fifty-eight minutes. Adam Verner does an excellent job narrating the book. Verner is a full-time audiobook narrator. He has won the Audiofile Earphones Award.
Abrams, beside cover the trial, also provides some history of the legal system of the 1800s. I think the author’s claim that this trial propelled Lincoln into the presidency is mistaken. The only claim one could make is that it was Lincoln’s last trial before declaring his campaign for the presidency. If you are a history buff or are interested in the history of law, you will find this book interesting. Dan Abrams is the legal affairs anchor for ABC News.
I read this as an audiobook downloaded from Audible. The book is eight hours and fifty-eight minutes. Adam Verner does an excellent job narrating the book. Verner is a full-time audiobook narrator. He has won the Audiofile Earphones Award.
June 5, 2018
What a fascinating book this is. Reading like a novel, it reveals the history of a murder case in which Abraham Lincoln defended an accused young man in Springfield, Illinois, in 1859. Due to the great good fortune of a transcript of the trial being found in the 1980’s, we are able to follow the trial almost verbatim from that hot summer so long ago.
Before the development of stenography, verbatim transcripts of trials simply didn’t exist. We are lucky that Robert Hitt, a steno man who was known to Abraham Lincoln, was invited to come to Springfield to cover the murder trial in which Lincoln was one of the defending attorneys. This could have been a dry, textbook-like book, but instead it draws the reader in with its immediacy.
Although most of the book is about the actual trial, the context in which the trial was set is beautifully explained. The Lincoln-Douglas debates (which Hitt had also covered) had recently taken place, elevating Abraham Lincoln to the national stage. It was clear that he was likely to make a try for the Republican candidacy for president, and the eyes of the nation were watching the trial to see what kind of man he was. Neither they, nor we, will be disappointed.
If you are a student of history, interested in Abraham Lincoln in particular, or just like legal thrillers, this is the book for you. It is a most interesting look at a time of Lincoln’s life which is less well-known than his early or later years, at a time when he was making his living as a lawyer in the growing Midwest. Here we see him as those who knew him best saw him, in his own time and place.
I am so glad I read this book, and I heartily recommend it
Before the development of stenography, verbatim transcripts of trials simply didn’t exist. We are lucky that Robert Hitt, a steno man who was known to Abraham Lincoln, was invited to come to Springfield to cover the murder trial in which Lincoln was one of the defending attorneys. This could have been a dry, textbook-like book, but instead it draws the reader in with its immediacy.
Although most of the book is about the actual trial, the context in which the trial was set is beautifully explained. The Lincoln-Douglas debates (which Hitt had also covered) had recently taken place, elevating Abraham Lincoln to the national stage. It was clear that he was likely to make a try for the Republican candidacy for president, and the eyes of the nation were watching the trial to see what kind of man he was. Neither they, nor we, will be disappointed.
If you are a student of history, interested in Abraham Lincoln in particular, or just like legal thrillers, this is the book for you. It is a most interesting look at a time of Lincoln’s life which is less well-known than his early or later years, at a time when he was making his living as a lawyer in the growing Midwest. Here we see him as those who knew him best saw him, in his own time and place.
I am so glad I read this book, and I heartily recommend it
September 6, 2018
This book first grabbed my attention when I read that it was written from the original 1859 transcript that was found in the defendant’s great grandson’s garage, back in 1989. It seems crazy that such a valuable piece of history was simply in a shoebox.
22 yr old Simeon (Peachy) Quinn Harrison was accused of killing Greek Crafton in what he claimed was self defense. This was a high profile case that took place in Springfield Illinois and garnered much attention. Lincoln was already known for his ability to argue a case. This was before his run for the presidency and I found it very interesting to learn about him and how his peers viewed him, outside of what you might read in a school textbook. Lincoln was a self taught lawyer and clearly one of the best in his time. This case came at the time Lincoln was considering a run for the presidency. Although he was viewed as the dark horse, he had many peers urging him on and backing him. This case was the boost that propelled him.
At this time, many laws were being created as situations arose. Shorthand was also new. Robert Hitt, a young stenographer at the time, had been hired to document the entire case. The wealthy families of those involved paid for this in case they wanted to appeal, otherwise it would not have been done.
I really enjoyed going back in time and getting a feel for the simplicity of how law was handled and people’s behaviors in that era. I also found it interesting to read what paths each person’s life took, after this case was finished.
22 yr old Simeon (Peachy) Quinn Harrison was accused of killing Greek Crafton in what he claimed was self defense. This was a high profile case that took place in Springfield Illinois and garnered much attention. Lincoln was already known for his ability to argue a case. This was before his run for the presidency and I found it very interesting to learn about him and how his peers viewed him, outside of what you might read in a school textbook. Lincoln was a self taught lawyer and clearly one of the best in his time. This case came at the time Lincoln was considering a run for the presidency. Although he was viewed as the dark horse, he had many peers urging him on and backing him. This case was the boost that propelled him.
At this time, many laws were being created as situations arose. Shorthand was also new. Robert Hitt, a young stenographer at the time, had been hired to document the entire case. The wealthy families of those involved paid for this in case they wanted to appeal, otherwise it would not have been done.
I really enjoyed going back in time and getting a feel for the simplicity of how law was handled and people’s behaviors in that era. I also found it interesting to read what paths each person’s life took, after this case was finished.
September 1, 2018
This was well-written if you like narrative non-fiction, and I did appreciate hearing more about the pre-Presidency Lincoln, but for the most part, this is just a blow-by-blow of a trial that happened over 150 years ago, with a lot of color commentary about how amazing Lincoln is.
I think, for the most part, real trials are pretty boring because they dissect in agonizing detail everything that happened in and around an event that could be described in about 5 minutes. There was some beef between two people in Springfield, Illinois (the nature of which I still don't totally understand, despite having read an entire book about it); combatant A and two of his friends confronted and attacked combatant B in a bar, at which point combatant B stabbed combatant A, which eventually led to his death. Now go on for a few hundred pages about their relationships, add some pontificating about how everyone in the courtroom probably felt at the time, and you've got this book.
I think the most interesting take-away here was that at the time, criminal defendants were not allowed to testify in their own defense, under the theory that they would probably lie to save themselves anyway. Just another strange part of the highly formalized kabuki-style argumentation that is a legal trial.
2.5 of 5 stars
I think, for the most part, real trials are pretty boring because they dissect in agonizing detail everything that happened in and around an event that could be described in about 5 minutes. There was some beef between two people in Springfield, Illinois (the nature of which I still don't totally understand, despite having read an entire book about it); combatant A and two of his friends confronted and attacked combatant B in a bar, at which point combatant B stabbed combatant A, which eventually led to his death. Now go on for a few hundred pages about their relationships, add some pontificating about how everyone in the courtroom probably felt at the time, and you've got this book.
I think the most interesting take-away here was that at the time, criminal defendants were not allowed to testify in their own defense, under the theory that they would probably lie to save themselves anyway. Just another strange part of the highly formalized kabuki-style argumentation that is a legal trial.
2.5 of 5 stars
March 15, 2025
Dan Abrams and David Fisher are back with another of their great examinations of a unique legal matter tied to a person of some notoriety. While I have read a number of the other books on which the authors have collaborated, I have heard a great deal about this tome, detailing the final case Abraham Lincoln defended before running for the presidency. Abrams and Fisher deliver a great depiction of events and show how Lincoln sought to use the law to support his client and make things clear, all without the need for trickery and duplicitous actions. Lincoln tried this murder case while also considering his political future, at a time when the country was teetering on the edge. A brilliant piece that kept me hooked until the final page.
It was the summer of 1859 when Springfield, Illinois came to life. The city was abuzz with the murder trial of Peachy Quinn Harrison. While many would say that it was a simple case and one where the defendant was guilty, the attorney hired for the defense wanted to do all he could to ensure that justice was done. Abraham Lincoln had a long history working in the law and had a long list of cases--including many for murder--where the courtroom came to life as the case unfolded. This would be the final case Lincoln worked before he chose to run for president, but there was another angle. Lincoln might be a local--albeit popular--lawyer, but his famed debates with Stephen Douglas the year before put him on the map. Scores of people flocked to the courthouse to watch Lincoln work and present the facts to the judge and jury to ensure Harrison got the best defense possible.
While the case was somewhat straightforward, Lincoln made sure not to fall into the pitfalls of media reports or gossiping witnesses. He sought to get to the core of the matter and ensure that the truth about a confrontation between two men came to light, splicing the different perspectives to get down to the foundation of truth. As the authors present both sides of the case, they argue that this case had more on the line than simply a man's life. It was Lincoln sticking his head out and sacrificing his reputation, which had been pristine up to that point. While he was known for his views on slavery, Lincoln would soon try to convince the national electorate that he was worthy of being the leader of the 1860s.
There were other issues related to the case, making it harder for Lincoln's neutrality or investment in the defense to come to pass. Lincoln knew both the victim and the family of the accused. His passionate legal arguments were based on fact and not rhetoric. Lincoln only wanted to use the legal rules laid out by the state, choosing not to utilise the media reports to try the case in the court of public opinion. By the time the case went to the jury, Lincoln felt that he had done all he could to ensure the defendant's innocence was on the minds of those who would determine if Peachy Quinn Harrison would hang. The nuances of the case and the courtroom battle would make for a brilliant set of facts and are depicted so well in the pages of this book. It is no wonder that Lincoln rose to the presidency, with thoughtful thinking and precise decision making from such a man.
I have always enjoyed the work of Dan Abrams and David Fisher. Their selection and presentation of legal matters, as well as the backstory about the historical figure are second to none. The piece reads like a well-honed narrative, flowing well from issue to issue, while also gaining mentions of historical relevance. The authors use a great deal of documentation to shed light on the matters at hand, as well as a detailed transcript of the case itself, which is a secondary storyline within this book. The authors build things from chapter to chapter and leave the reader needing more as they delve deeper into the legal battle. I could not have asked for more and am eager to look into this and other things Lincoln related when I have some time.
Kudos, Messrs. Abrams and Fisher, for another stellar piece of writing.
Love/hate the review? An ever-growing collection of others appears at: http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/
It was the summer of 1859 when Springfield, Illinois came to life. The city was abuzz with the murder trial of Peachy Quinn Harrison. While many would say that it was a simple case and one where the defendant was guilty, the attorney hired for the defense wanted to do all he could to ensure that justice was done. Abraham Lincoln had a long history working in the law and had a long list of cases--including many for murder--where the courtroom came to life as the case unfolded. This would be the final case Lincoln worked before he chose to run for president, but there was another angle. Lincoln might be a local--albeit popular--lawyer, but his famed debates with Stephen Douglas the year before put him on the map. Scores of people flocked to the courthouse to watch Lincoln work and present the facts to the judge and jury to ensure Harrison got the best defense possible.
While the case was somewhat straightforward, Lincoln made sure not to fall into the pitfalls of media reports or gossiping witnesses. He sought to get to the core of the matter and ensure that the truth about a confrontation between two men came to light, splicing the different perspectives to get down to the foundation of truth. As the authors present both sides of the case, they argue that this case had more on the line than simply a man's life. It was Lincoln sticking his head out and sacrificing his reputation, which had been pristine up to that point. While he was known for his views on slavery, Lincoln would soon try to convince the national electorate that he was worthy of being the leader of the 1860s.
There were other issues related to the case, making it harder for Lincoln's neutrality or investment in the defense to come to pass. Lincoln knew both the victim and the family of the accused. His passionate legal arguments were based on fact and not rhetoric. Lincoln only wanted to use the legal rules laid out by the state, choosing not to utilise the media reports to try the case in the court of public opinion. By the time the case went to the jury, Lincoln felt that he had done all he could to ensure the defendant's innocence was on the minds of those who would determine if Peachy Quinn Harrison would hang. The nuances of the case and the courtroom battle would make for a brilliant set of facts and are depicted so well in the pages of this book. It is no wonder that Lincoln rose to the presidency, with thoughtful thinking and precise decision making from such a man.
I have always enjoyed the work of Dan Abrams and David Fisher. Their selection and presentation of legal matters, as well as the backstory about the historical figure are second to none. The piece reads like a well-honed narrative, flowing well from issue to issue, while also gaining mentions of historical relevance. The authors use a great deal of documentation to shed light on the matters at hand, as well as a detailed transcript of the case itself, which is a secondary storyline within this book. The authors build things from chapter to chapter and leave the reader needing more as they delve deeper into the legal battle. I could not have asked for more and am eager to look into this and other things Lincoln related when I have some time.
Kudos, Messrs. Abrams and Fisher, for another stellar piece of writing.
Love/hate the review? An ever-growing collection of others appears at: http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/
March 15, 2020
A lot of information about Lincoln, especially about him in his legal practice. Very interesting, a fascinating story, told well, but in many ways a common story of pride, unbridled youth and machismo.
The syntax threw me at times and therefore I reduced one star.
The syntax threw me at times and therefore I reduced one star.
July 11, 2019
A well-researched and nicely written account of Lincoln's defense in a murder case that could have altered the course of history had the trial outcome been different. Abraham Lincoln had a substantial reputation as an attorney and an individual previous to him accepting this murder case. The man put a lot on the line when he took on this responsibility with the Republican nomination for president in the upcoming 1860 election. Somehow, given our 16th president's reputation for integrity, it's little wonder he took on the case and gave it his all.
February 2, 2021
I like to read material on Lincoln. So, this history was right up my alley. It's strange to imagine Lincoln as the Perry Mason of his time and accepting a murder case. Much of the testimony was recorded by a courtroom stenographer, an emerging feature of trials. Of course Lincoln would go on to much bigger and better things. While he's a fascinating personality, some of the dry courtroom proceedings didn't hold my attention as much. Overall, however, I enjoyed reading this book.
April 23, 2025
“Ask yourself: what is the justice in this case?” A. Lincoln
Exhaustive review of a trial transcript with explanatory amplifications. By the authors’ own admission, Lincoln was already headed toward the presidency, and their work gives no indication how it “propelled him to the presidency,” rather how he dodged a bullet that could have killed his dark horse bid at the Republican nomination.
“I must say I do not think myself fit for the presidency.” A. Lincoln (1859)
Based on the recently recovered transcript of Robert Roberts Hitt. Telling the story from Hitt’s point of view saved the author’s from putting too many words into Lincoln’s mouth. But because the transcript was all they had that was new, the reader is subjected to pages of irrelevant background. Too much analysis.
“Hitt never heard another man able to turn words into feelings quite like that.”
Unfortunately, Hitt did not record the closing arguments. By everyone’s admission this is where Lincoln won the case, but all we have is Hitt’s summary and the authors’ speculation what was actually said.
“No man has a good enough memory to be a successful liar.” A. Lincoln
Of more interest to aficionados of courtroom drama than to historians.
“People grow into murders; they didn’t just happen.” A. Lincoln
Exhaustive review of a trial transcript with explanatory amplifications. By the authors’ own admission, Lincoln was already headed toward the presidency, and their work gives no indication how it “propelled him to the presidency,” rather how he dodged a bullet that could have killed his dark horse bid at the Republican nomination.
“I must say I do not think myself fit for the presidency.” A. Lincoln (1859)
Based on the recently recovered transcript of Robert Roberts Hitt. Telling the story from Hitt’s point of view saved the author’s from putting too many words into Lincoln’s mouth. But because the transcript was all they had that was new, the reader is subjected to pages of irrelevant background. Too much analysis.
“Hitt never heard another man able to turn words into feelings quite like that.”
Unfortunately, Hitt did not record the closing arguments. By everyone’s admission this is where Lincoln won the case, but all we have is Hitt’s summary and the authors’ speculation what was actually said.
“No man has a good enough memory to be a successful liar.” A. Lincoln
Of more interest to aficionados of courtroom drama than to historians.
“People grow into murders; they didn’t just happen.” A. Lincoln
April 14, 2019
I did enjoy this book, however I thought Author Dad Abrams got off topic a lot. The testimony of the witnesses was repetitive at times however I did learn a lot about Abraham Lincoln which was an objective to reading this book, he was an intelligent man and the materials I have read over the years of past US Presidents, I have come to understand it is a special intellect that makes a good solid president.
In describing the courtroom “ most of the court officials sat or stood in front of the judge’s bench, separated from the gallery by a low rail called the bar; called that because it was likened to the great sandbar in the Thames River east of London harbour....”
Abram’s often asked his dad how he could become a better writer like you, he responded “ there is only one way, read more books, those words continue to inspire Dan even today.
In describing the courtroom “ most of the court officials sat or stood in front of the judge’s bench, separated from the gallery by a low rail called the bar; called that because it was likened to the great sandbar in the Thames River east of London harbour....”
Abram’s often asked his dad how he could become a better writer like you, he responded “ there is only one way, read more books, those words continue to inspire Dan even today.
July 17, 2021
Abraham Lincoln was a lawyer before he was President. By all accounts, he was a good one, too. He was that rarest of lawyers: an honest one. Even in Lincoln’s day, the reputation (perhaps unfair) that all lawyers were sleazy and dishonest was a prevalent one. This was, of course, before the existence of used car salesmen and people named Donald Trump, so lawyers were pretty much the universal scapegoat.
Lincoln was different, though. Well-liked and known for being a straight shooter, Lincoln had a good reputation among his community members in Springfield, Illinois. If you needed a good defense attorney, Lincoln was known for doing all he could for you. He never guaranteed a win (part of that whole “honesty” thing), but he would fight a strong legal battle on your behalf.
In 1859, Lincoln was at the start of a presidential campaign, seriously considering running on the Republican ticket for the upcoming election. He was already nationally-known due to his deft speechifying with Senator Stephen Douglas. He had a lot on his plate at the time. In today’s political climate, a presidential candidate wouldn’t think of doing anything but campaign, but the world---and politics---were a little different back then. Lincoln decided to take on a murder trial. Defending a young man who had definitely killed another young man, in broad daylight, with plenty of witnesses.
Dan Abrams and David Fisher’s “Lincoln’s Last Trial” is a nonfiction account of this somewhat forgotten but significant murder trial, one that further cast Lincoln as an honest man and a deft politician.
Peachy Quinn Harrison never denied killing Greek Crafton. How could he? He provided the murder weapon himself, there were at least three eyewitnesses (including the murder victim, who died later from the wounds inflicted by Harrison), and he admitted to it. There was, unfortunately, a lot more to the case than the straight facts indicated.
In today’s parlance, Harrison was “jumped”. It was, Lincoln argued, a clear case of self defense, as Harrison was taken by surprise by more than one potential attackers. He lashed out with the only weapon he could find at the time, and while he may not have intentionally set out to murder Crafton, his action resulted in Crafton’s death just the same.
The case had some unique properties. The victim was a young man that Lincoln himself had mentored as a future lawyer. His defendant was the grandson of a political rival of Lincoln’s, one that had no love for Lincoln. Almost everyone in town had already chosen sides, so the atmosphere of the small town was divisive and incendiary. If ever there was a case that Lincoln probably should have said no to, it was this one.
What follows, then, is a fascinating account of a case in which the question, “What is self-defense?” is examined thoroughly. It was a case that touched upon bullying and the shifting perceptions of eyewitness accounts. It was a case in which the facts didn’t always reveal the truth.
Abrams and Fisher also use the case, subtly, as a foreshadowing for the tragic national events that would follow shortly after Lincoln’s election. Without overtly saying it outright, the case of Peachy Quinn Harrison becomes a precursor for the Civil War, when communities would again be violently divided by taking sides in the moral quandary of slavery.
Lincoln was different, though. Well-liked and known for being a straight shooter, Lincoln had a good reputation among his community members in Springfield, Illinois. If you needed a good defense attorney, Lincoln was known for doing all he could for you. He never guaranteed a win (part of that whole “honesty” thing), but he would fight a strong legal battle on your behalf.
In 1859, Lincoln was at the start of a presidential campaign, seriously considering running on the Republican ticket for the upcoming election. He was already nationally-known due to his deft speechifying with Senator Stephen Douglas. He had a lot on his plate at the time. In today’s political climate, a presidential candidate wouldn’t think of doing anything but campaign, but the world---and politics---were a little different back then. Lincoln decided to take on a murder trial. Defending a young man who had definitely killed another young man, in broad daylight, with plenty of witnesses.
Dan Abrams and David Fisher’s “Lincoln’s Last Trial” is a nonfiction account of this somewhat forgotten but significant murder trial, one that further cast Lincoln as an honest man and a deft politician.
Peachy Quinn Harrison never denied killing Greek Crafton. How could he? He provided the murder weapon himself, there were at least three eyewitnesses (including the murder victim, who died later from the wounds inflicted by Harrison), and he admitted to it. There was, unfortunately, a lot more to the case than the straight facts indicated.
In today’s parlance, Harrison was “jumped”. It was, Lincoln argued, a clear case of self defense, as Harrison was taken by surprise by more than one potential attackers. He lashed out with the only weapon he could find at the time, and while he may not have intentionally set out to murder Crafton, his action resulted in Crafton’s death just the same.
The case had some unique properties. The victim was a young man that Lincoln himself had mentored as a future lawyer. His defendant was the grandson of a political rival of Lincoln’s, one that had no love for Lincoln. Almost everyone in town had already chosen sides, so the atmosphere of the small town was divisive and incendiary. If ever there was a case that Lincoln probably should have said no to, it was this one.
What follows, then, is a fascinating account of a case in which the question, “What is self-defense?” is examined thoroughly. It was a case that touched upon bullying and the shifting perceptions of eyewitness accounts. It was a case in which the facts didn’t always reveal the truth.
Abrams and Fisher also use the case, subtly, as a foreshadowing for the tragic national events that would follow shortly after Lincoln’s election. Without overtly saying it outright, the case of Peachy Quinn Harrison becomes a precursor for the Civil War, when communities would again be violently divided by taking sides in the moral quandary of slavery.
October 10, 2019
This is the account of the last murder trial at which Abraham Lincoln served as legal counsel. It is largely based on a court reporter’s transcript of the proceedings. But the transcript of the trial is supplemented with descriptors to give narrative flow (e.g. the witness hesitated before answering, Lincoln looked down at the table as if checking his notes, the judged mopped the sweat from his brow), bits and pieces which would not have been in the historical record. I can understand how such details could make a book more readable. But, the authors went beyond such simple additions to include what individuals were reading on break, the internal thoughts of various figures, the length of the outhouse line, even vocal tone and facial expressions from private conversations. Some of these provided a spring board for the author to include information on the history of Illinois, slavery, the development of various legal precedence most of which might have been interesting, but not relevant to the narrative. Other creative details painted the defendant in a more sympathetic light than the victim’s brother. I hear that there is a new category of book, fictionalized non-fiction. Unfortunately, this category does not appear in a book’s description nor is there a library shelf designating these titles. For me, this felt more like historical fiction, a wonderful category of novel, but simply not what I was expecting when I opened this book. Other than this being Lincoln’s last litigated murder trial, nothing in this account struck me as particularly noteworthy.
December 27, 2017
[Note: This book was provided free of charge by Edelweiss/Hanover Square. All thoughts and opinions are my own.]
The title of this book is not entirely accurate. While this was the last sensational case that Lincoln handled as an attorney before his nomination for the presidency, he had a few smaller cases after this one finished in the summer of 1859. Also, it is a bit of a stretch to say that this case propelled him to the presidency, although it could have done a lot of harm had he lost the case or embarrassed himself in how he handled it. Even so, this book manages to do something unusual, and that is provide something new to say about Lincoln studies by focusing on a long-lost court transcript written by a noted court reporter named Hitt who serves as the center of this particular story. Lincoln's relationship with the law [1] serves as a fertile place for people to write about for largely unknown insights about the man given the large amount of his life that has been picked pretty clean by writers. The author does a good job here of placing the murder case and its political complexities in a larger societal context as well as the history of law, all of which I found to be handled well.
The book takes a generally chronological approach to the case at its center, beginning with an introduction about a feud between two young people that ended up in the violent death of one of them, who had been a clerk for Lincoln and Herndon and whose grandfather had been a longtime political nemesis of Lincoln in Illinois politics, itinerant Methodist preacher Dixon Cartwright. The author follows the course of the case and allows the detailed court transcript to make the hot and stuffy Springfield courthouse come alive, as well as the offices and taverns afterward where stories are swapped. The author manages to keep tension alive about the case's outcome and also includes a few flashbacks about Lincoln's previous behavior of the law or how he was thought by others as well as Hitt's background and his work as an expert stenographer. The author also engages in a bit of puffing up of the book's length to close to 300 pages by adding information about Lincoln's importance to malpractice law and the history of the laws of self-defense and the somewhat informal nature of the legal practice in antebellum Illinois, all of which allow the reader to gain some understanding about the context of the law in early American history.
What separates this book from a decent and competent book, though, is the deeper pathos to which this book is filled. Somewhere around the middle of the book I was feeling slightly irritated by the fact that the author included so many reconstructed conversations about the stenographer with other people until I realized that the author was making a subtle point drawing the fate of two hotheaded young men whose feuding led to a fight that neither could back down from while preserving their honor, and how someone who did not want to fight felt forced in self-defense to use deadly force against his assailant with the fate of the United States as a whole. The warring factions in the outskirts of Springfield are connected to the warring factions within the United States as the Civil War approached, with honor and pride forcing a conflict that most people would have preferred to avoid, and where many men knew what was right but were unable to keep the nation as a whole from having a fight every bit as tragic as the one which led to the court case by which Lincoln turned from a man trying to make peace in his own community to a man who presided over the most destructive war that we have ever fought as a nation against ourselves.
[1] See, for example:
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2017...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2017...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2015...
The title of this book is not entirely accurate. While this was the last sensational case that Lincoln handled as an attorney before his nomination for the presidency, he had a few smaller cases after this one finished in the summer of 1859. Also, it is a bit of a stretch to say that this case propelled him to the presidency, although it could have done a lot of harm had he lost the case or embarrassed himself in how he handled it. Even so, this book manages to do something unusual, and that is provide something new to say about Lincoln studies by focusing on a long-lost court transcript written by a noted court reporter named Hitt who serves as the center of this particular story. Lincoln's relationship with the law [1] serves as a fertile place for people to write about for largely unknown insights about the man given the large amount of his life that has been picked pretty clean by writers. The author does a good job here of placing the murder case and its political complexities in a larger societal context as well as the history of law, all of which I found to be handled well.
The book takes a generally chronological approach to the case at its center, beginning with an introduction about a feud between two young people that ended up in the violent death of one of them, who had been a clerk for Lincoln and Herndon and whose grandfather had been a longtime political nemesis of Lincoln in Illinois politics, itinerant Methodist preacher Dixon Cartwright. The author follows the course of the case and allows the detailed court transcript to make the hot and stuffy Springfield courthouse come alive, as well as the offices and taverns afterward where stories are swapped. The author manages to keep tension alive about the case's outcome and also includes a few flashbacks about Lincoln's previous behavior of the law or how he was thought by others as well as Hitt's background and his work as an expert stenographer. The author also engages in a bit of puffing up of the book's length to close to 300 pages by adding information about Lincoln's importance to malpractice law and the history of the laws of self-defense and the somewhat informal nature of the legal practice in antebellum Illinois, all of which allow the reader to gain some understanding about the context of the law in early American history.
What separates this book from a decent and competent book, though, is the deeper pathos to which this book is filled. Somewhere around the middle of the book I was feeling slightly irritated by the fact that the author included so many reconstructed conversations about the stenographer with other people until I realized that the author was making a subtle point drawing the fate of two hotheaded young men whose feuding led to a fight that neither could back down from while preserving their honor, and how someone who did not want to fight felt forced in self-defense to use deadly force against his assailant with the fate of the United States as a whole. The warring factions in the outskirts of Springfield are connected to the warring factions within the United States as the Civil War approached, with honor and pride forcing a conflict that most people would have preferred to avoid, and where many men knew what was right but were unable to keep the nation as a whole from having a fight every bit as tragic as the one which led to the court case by which Lincoln turned from a man trying to make peace in his own community to a man who presided over the most destructive war that we have ever fought as a nation against ourselves.
[1] See, for example:
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2017...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2017...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2015...
August 20, 2018
You can see how this book was put together. The author did a prodigious amount of research to put this together. He had a good place to start. The trial in focus was one of the first in downstate Illinois that had a trial transcript. It wasn’t complete in our sense of modern court transcripts – the closing arguments weren’t captured – but the trial, with teams of lawyers on both sides, was captured in detail. The authors then researched the people involved in the trial, from the judge to the witnesses to the court crier, if I heard that right (sounded like a court bailiff to me). The author researched to a deep level. We learn that the crier used a different, somewhat unique call to order for court. We learn of some of the other travelers in town that could have met up with the principals in the story. We learn about the times – a townsman suggests a visitor tour Springfield’s top tourist attraction, the town stables, from where the Donner party departed. And you get Lincoln, a towering presence in the book, in the trial and in the many anecdotes that are included to give life to the story.
The author took this research and created a story that included the trial, but also included background and tangential anecdotes, all added to the story. It becomes a whole story, but with a few odd tangential bits that added to the flavor but detracted from the flow. You end up with a very readable book, cinematic in description. Lincoln really stands out. As presented, his character would make an excellent lawyer in a legal drama on TV. -smart and pithy. You get these interesting characters, but you also get the legal duel. At one point, you see Lincoln’s side pulls recent relevant case law, then you see the opposition finding older case law to cite. Quite a bit of the story turns on the ability of Lincoln to think ahead of his opponents and to use what we would now call “persuasion techniques” to sway the judge and jury.
I listened to this audiobook, and found it very easy to listen to and to follow. But given this was a history book with plenty of conjectured events and conversations, I would have appreciated the paper version if it had plentiful footnotes to call out those conjectures from the record. Given the base story and how the author made it interesting, I look forward to more by this author.
The author took this research and created a story that included the trial, but also included background and tangential anecdotes, all added to the story. It becomes a whole story, but with a few odd tangential bits that added to the flavor but detracted from the flow. You end up with a very readable book, cinematic in description. Lincoln really stands out. As presented, his character would make an excellent lawyer in a legal drama on TV. -smart and pithy. You get these interesting characters, but you also get the legal duel. At one point, you see Lincoln’s side pulls recent relevant case law, then you see the opposition finding older case law to cite. Quite a bit of the story turns on the ability of Lincoln to think ahead of his opponents and to use what we would now call “persuasion techniques” to sway the judge and jury.
I listened to this audiobook, and found it very easy to listen to and to follow. But given this was a history book with plenty of conjectured events and conversations, I would have appreciated the paper version if it had plentiful footnotes to call out those conjectures from the record. Given the base story and how the author made it interesting, I look forward to more by this author.
February 28, 2021
This is about a murder that took place in plains in late 1850s! Definitely recommend to all my spfld friends. (Idk how i missed this when it first came out)
March 24, 2023
As an Abe Lincoln fan, I read this book anticipating a little more pace. It shows ways that evidence rules were created in the courtroom.
Lawyers used to ride the circuit to the courthouses.
Lawyers used to ride the circuit to the courthouses.
June 18, 2018
As a person who has never heard of Lincoln's last murder case, I found this book very informative. Not only Abe Lincoln was yet again proven to be a great leader but he had an amazing ability to win a case that was set for failure from the beginning.
For those who do not know the case, Peachy Quinn Harrison had stabbed Greek Crafton during a fight. Days earlier the two had another clash during town's gathering and both made treats against each other. The night of the horrific incident, Peachy pulled the knife and stabbed Greek in self-defense. Well, that's what he's been repeating since that dreadful night. As new evidence regarding fight details came to light together with Greek Crafton's deathbed confession, Peachy Quinn Harrison was released and Abe Lincoln gained admiration, popularity, and well-deserved recognition.
The story was very well written, short and straight to the point. It was an easy and captivating read. I was lured into the pages of the book and could not get enough of the case. I even did a little research on this case online, and surprisingly, was not able to find any new facts that I have not read in the book. Thank you, Dan Abrams and David Fisher for this phenomenal book and story.
For those who do not know the case, Peachy Quinn Harrison had stabbed Greek Crafton during a fight. Days earlier the two had another clash during town's gathering and both made treats against each other. The night of the horrific incident, Peachy pulled the knife and stabbed Greek in self-defense. Well, that's what he's been repeating since that dreadful night. As new evidence regarding fight details came to light together with Greek Crafton's deathbed confession, Peachy Quinn Harrison was released and Abe Lincoln gained admiration, popularity, and well-deserved recognition.
The story was very well written, short and straight to the point. It was an easy and captivating read. I was lured into the pages of the book and could not get enough of the case. I even did a little research on this case online, and surprisingly, was not able to find any new facts that I have not read in the book. Thank you, Dan Abrams and David Fisher for this phenomenal book and story.
July 25, 2024
Oddly enough, the only reason I feel slightly disappointed by the this book is the title. After the conclusion of the trial, there isn’t much of an explanation as to how this case truly propelled Lincoln into the presidency. In basically every other way, this is an amazing book. The details of the stenographer Robert Hitt, the way Lincoln argued in court, and the play by play of the trial’s events and planning is incredible. It truly paints a picture that absorbs you into the time, the tension, and the trial.
August 28, 2020
I really enjoyed the book. The fact that the trial details came from actual transcripts made the testimony extremely compelling.
January 18, 2024
This book had been on my Want to Read list for a few years and I finally decided I was in the mood to read it which was free on my Unlimited Kindle.
I learned some interesting things from reading this. The most fascinating was that the author(s) were able to write about the events of Lincoln’s last major trial because the trial had been transcribed by Robert Hitt, a transcriber who became well known for this skill during a time when it was a new way of recording legal events. Mr. Hitt was used as the narrator of this story, told from his viewpoint. The transcript of almost the whole trial was found in 1989 in storage at the Fresno, California home of the great grandson of the accused murderer.
I enjoyed reading about Lincoln’s experiences as a lawyer; how he was self taught, defended all kinds of legal and criminal matters and worked as a traveling lawyer along with other lawyers on various circuits. The trial in this book was presented as helping to propel him to the presidency, due to how much interest there was in the case and the number of people that attended the hearings in Springfield, Illinois. At the time of the hearings, Lincoln was already known to be a great speaker and had finished the famous debates with Stephen Douglas. The descriptions of how the trial was conducted during that time period was also of interest.
So, the book had some compelling features to it, but I am giving it three stars because for much of the reading it was dry and boring. About halfway through I was losing interest and found my attention constantly wandering. Once the trial started and the many witnesses were put on the stand, it became repetitive and dull as each was analyzed. I thought the crime itself was not that exciting - a dispute between two young men from well to do families at odds over a supposed family matter. Their disagreement led to one murdering the other. Lincoln was part of a defense team, so he is not the only player talked about involved in the trial. In addition, the authors added their own interpretation of events along with newspapers, books or other writings from the time period. I think the book would have been better if it had not been overdone and over described.
Although this book was not that long, of average length, seemed to take forever for me to get through it. By the end I was doing some speed reading to finish (I am a slow reader). All that said, I am glad I spent some time with Lincoln and his last big trial.
I learned some interesting things from reading this. The most fascinating was that the author(s) were able to write about the events of Lincoln’s last major trial because the trial had been transcribed by Robert Hitt, a transcriber who became well known for this skill during a time when it was a new way of recording legal events. Mr. Hitt was used as the narrator of this story, told from his viewpoint. The transcript of almost the whole trial was found in 1989 in storage at the Fresno, California home of the great grandson of the accused murderer.
I enjoyed reading about Lincoln’s experiences as a lawyer; how he was self taught, defended all kinds of legal and criminal matters and worked as a traveling lawyer along with other lawyers on various circuits. The trial in this book was presented as helping to propel him to the presidency, due to how much interest there was in the case and the number of people that attended the hearings in Springfield, Illinois. At the time of the hearings, Lincoln was already known to be a great speaker and had finished the famous debates with Stephen Douglas. The descriptions of how the trial was conducted during that time period was also of interest.
So, the book had some compelling features to it, but I am giving it three stars because for much of the reading it was dry and boring. About halfway through I was losing interest and found my attention constantly wandering. Once the trial started and the many witnesses were put on the stand, it became repetitive and dull as each was analyzed. I thought the crime itself was not that exciting - a dispute between two young men from well to do families at odds over a supposed family matter. Their disagreement led to one murdering the other. Lincoln was part of a defense team, so he is not the only player talked about involved in the trial. In addition, the authors added their own interpretation of events along with newspapers, books or other writings from the time period. I think the book would have been better if it had not been overdone and over described.
Although this book was not that long, of average length, seemed to take forever for me to get through it. By the end I was doing some speed reading to finish (I am a slow reader). All that said, I am glad I spent some time with Lincoln and his last big trial.
June 17, 2020
I would have to call this a 4-, because of some flaws, but I enjoyed it tremendously. I love courtroom dramas, and this one was real! Plus it was Abraham Lincoln! It is well-told, sounding more like a novel than nonfiction, although there is lots of very interesting history woven in. I especially appreciated the legal history, e.g., I had no idea that in 1859 a defendant could NOT testify at his trial, because he could not be expected to tell the truth! This is a fascinating book, and it has favorable blurbs from people like Diane Sawyer and Jeffrey Toobin.
But does NO ONE pay attention to details??? Or have someone read the book before it is published??? (Maybe that explains why there are so many bugs in the software I use these days!) I am tired of things like reading that Hitt was "finishing a glorious supper. The Globe's cook had prepared spicy lamb chops." And then two pages later it says "Hitt savored his beefsteak and fried onions." Unless he ate dinner twice, there is something wrong. And there are WAY TOO MANY sentence fragments that any reasonable person would have corrected if they read it a second time.
The second shortcoming is maybe insurmountable. The book is based on ACTUAL transcripts of the testimony, quoted verbatim, and more often than I would expect I found it hard to understand. Probably it was easier to understand if you heard the tone of the person's voice or were accustomed to the way people spoke in that era and that area.
Those flaws are not enough to refrain from reading the book, though, if you are at all interested in history or enjoy courtroom stories.
But does NO ONE pay attention to details??? Or have someone read the book before it is published??? (Maybe that explains why there are so many bugs in the software I use these days!) I am tired of things like reading that Hitt was "finishing a glorious supper. The Globe's cook had prepared spicy lamb chops." And then two pages later it says "Hitt savored his beefsteak and fried onions." Unless he ate dinner twice, there is something wrong. And there are WAY TOO MANY sentence fragments that any reasonable person would have corrected if they read it a second time.
The second shortcoming is maybe insurmountable. The book is based on ACTUAL transcripts of the testimony, quoted verbatim, and more often than I would expect I found it hard to understand. Probably it was easier to understand if you heard the tone of the person's voice or were accustomed to the way people spoke in that era and that area.
Those flaws are not enough to refrain from reading the book, though, if you are at all interested in history or enjoy courtroom stories.
September 30, 2019
Very interesting look at what was at least the last serious trial for Lincoln as a lawyer.
Beyond another peek at Lincoln's skills as a lawyer, which have been documented many times, we also get a look at early developments in stenography and other issues.
The one main thing I learned, besides about Lincoln himself, is that defendants could not testify in their own trials at this time. Interesting, no?
I won't offer up more, to avoid spoiler alerts, other than to say that Lincoln surmounted this hurdle and won.
The book otherwise presents a good look at the complex of professional legal relationships in and around Springfield at this time.
Like some people, I wish Abrams had been more specific on how much he went beyond Hitt, especially in recreating the closing arguments and what sources he used beside Hitt. I also wish Abrams (even if first suggested by agent or publisher) hadn't signed off on the subtitle of this case propelling Lincoln to the presidency.
No, the Lincoln-Douglas debates followed by the Cooper Union speech were the two biggest elements in that. This was much more minor.
This is still a four-star book with those nits, though.
Beyond another peek at Lincoln's skills as a lawyer, which have been documented many times, we also get a look at early developments in stenography and other issues.
The one main thing I learned, besides about Lincoln himself, is that defendants could not testify in their own trials at this time. Interesting, no?
I won't offer up more, to avoid spoiler alerts, other than to say that Lincoln surmounted this hurdle and won.
The book otherwise presents a good look at the complex of professional legal relationships in and around Springfield at this time.
Like some people, I wish Abrams had been more specific on how much he went beyond Hitt, especially in recreating the closing arguments and what sources he used beside Hitt. I also wish Abrams (even if first suggested by agent or publisher) hadn't signed off on the subtitle of this case propelling Lincoln to the presidency.
No, the Lincoln-Douglas debates followed by the Cooper Union speech were the two biggest elements in that. This was much more minor.
This is still a four-star book with those nits, though.
March 21, 2019
21. I was fascinated by this historical find and felt the work was thoughtfully presented and gave the reader a glimpse into the past of nineteenth century law. Lincoln had a remarkable mind no doubt and against all odds made his case for the defense of his client. It also brought his name to the forefront of candidates for the Presidency as the case was highly publicized. Those that are interested in history especially revolving around Lincoln will especially enjoy this read.
July 7, 2020
This was my first book about Lincoln and I learned a lot. I liked the way this book was organized, as it wasn't all trial, but also went into Lincoln's history and his projection into politics. It talked about his personality traits and his rivals within Springfield. For a non-fiction this was captivating, not super boring or overflowing with dates and facts that become distracting. A job well done by the authors.
January 23, 2019
I think all history buffs, lawyers and future lawyers should read this book. There is so much to be said for character and a strong moral compass. This was from a time where honestly, charity, and human values mattered. There is a lot to be learned by how Lincoln approached the jury and how he led his life. They didn’t call him Honest Abe for nothing. When you read this you recognize why.
July 24, 2018
Here is a very small part of why I enjoyed this book: “...Hitt’s original transcript of the trial was...discovered in 1989 in a shoebox stored in the garage of the... defendant’s great-grandson.” (Hitt was the equivalent of the court reporter.)
December 18, 2018
I had no idea that Lincoln was such a distinguished and accomplished litigator. However, I wonder how successful he would be if he was a lawyer today because he would not be allowed to say so many things during closing argument that endeared him with jurors.
Read
August 22, 2021This is a historical shaggy dog story: a long, precise accounting of a court case – which was NOT Lincoln’s last trial, though it was his last murder trial (but that would make a worse title), leading to a deeply unsatisfying conclusion. Why unsatisfying? Because Abraham gave a thrilling three hour long plea to the jury, which went unrecorded (though contemporary newspapers DESCRIBED it – but that’s not enough).
Nonetheless Lincoln’s Last Trial brought me closer to the living Lincoln than any other book I’ve read – and I am an amateur scholar of the 16th president. Abe was a performer, the particular type of performer we call a “trial lawyer.” In Illinois, which he crisscrossed for years with the Circuit Court. Lincoln wasn’t considered a grotesque uneducated ape-like creature, as the national press depicted him once he was in the White House. He was a beloved philosopher & showman. Abraham only took cases that he believed in. (Does any such lawyer exist today?) Though his knowledge of legal detail was not extensive – he never went to law school, of course – Abe learned to argue persuasively and soulfully.
And that’s how Abraham became president. He argued with Stephen Douglas up and down his state, then presented an argument at the brand-new Cooper Union in 1860 that convinced jaded New York intellectuals he was a moral hero.
This book is based on the precise notes of the gifted court stenographer Robert Roberts Hitt, which were lost for 126 years, then recovered in a shoebox in Carthage, Illinois in 1985.*
*I couldn’t find the details, so I made up this last sentence – but it’s pretty close to the truth.
Nonetheless Lincoln’s Last Trial brought me closer to the living Lincoln than any other book I’ve read – and I am an amateur scholar of the 16th president. Abe was a performer, the particular type of performer we call a “trial lawyer.” In Illinois, which he crisscrossed for years with the Circuit Court. Lincoln wasn’t considered a grotesque uneducated ape-like creature, as the national press depicted him once he was in the White House. He was a beloved philosopher & showman. Abraham only took cases that he believed in. (Does any such lawyer exist today?) Though his knowledge of legal detail was not extensive – he never went to law school, of course – Abe learned to argue persuasively and soulfully.
And that’s how Abraham became president. He argued with Stephen Douglas up and down his state, then presented an argument at the brand-new Cooper Union in 1860 that convinced jaded New York intellectuals he was a moral hero.
This book is based on the precise notes of the gifted court stenographer Robert Roberts Hitt, which were lost for 126 years, then recovered in a shoebox in Carthage, Illinois in 1985.*
*I couldn’t find the details, so I made up this last sentence – but it’s pretty close to the truth.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 759 reviews