An Honest Calling: The Law Practice of Abraham Lincoln

by Mark E. Steiner

Steiner describes Lincoln's legal education, the economics of the law office, and the changes in the practice of law that Lincoln himself experienced as the nation became an industrial, capitalist society. Abraham Lincoln embraced a professional ideal which cast the lawyer as a guardian of order and, adopting a service mentality, represented clients to the best of his ability regardless of his own beliefs about the justice or morality of their claims.

Genres: History

282 pages, Hardcover

First published August 10, 2006

Reviews

[David Kent]

An exceptionally scholarly examination of Abraham Lincoln's law practice. Using the voluminous primary materials newly available from the Legal Papers of Abraham Lincoln project, lawyer Mark E. Steiner provides an in-depth review of the nature of Lincoln's cases, and the case of Lincoln's nature. He notes that most previous examinations of Lincoln's law practice were more anecdotal than analytical and largely focused on the same four or five cases out of the thousands of cases Lincoln handled. The author digs deeper and broader, and the result is a book that should be an excellent resource for other scholarly researchers.

Steiner puts Lincoln's law career into the context of the times and contrasting the broad differences between mythology and reality. Neither a country hack nor a corporate lawyer - the two extremes of the spectrum assigned to Lincoln - he was successful doing what most lawyers of the period did. The majority of his cases were the basic, rather unsexy mainstays of the time - debt collection, slander, and community servicing. Steiner details the sum of these in broad sweeps and specific examples.

While comprehensive, the book doesn't cover everything. Missing is analysis of Lincoln's small number of murder cases or his patent-related work. That said, Steiner does dig deep into a few notable cases and lines of work.

For example, Chapter 5 examines in great detail "In the Matter of Jane, A Woman of Color," this being the case where Lincoln participated on the side of a slave owner attempting to maintain "his property," i.e., a woman and four of her children. Historians have spent many hours and pages of print trying to reconcile Lincoln's involvement in a case that seemingly contradicts his position that slavery is wrong. Steiner diligently cites letters and case precedent that explain Lincoln's role and speculate on why he participated. This is the most in-depth analysis of the case I've seen, and as such should be an excellent starting point for future researchers.

Chapter 6 delves into Lincoln's railroad cases, including and especially his tenure under retainer for the Illinois Central Railroad. Steiner provides background on several cases in which Lincoln sued the railroad on behalf of landowners, but also on his work for the railroad against landowners. The chapter also includes a long analysis of the one time Lincoln sued the Illinois Central Railroad for collection of his fee, a whopping $5000. The depth of research derived from the Legal Papers project is evident.

Finally, Steiner suggests that Lincoln was not all that comfortable with the changing legal landscape. Early legal work for Lincoln and most prairie lawyers revolved around local disputes and required, and benefited from, the ability to resolve issues with a minimum of litigation. Lincoln excelled at this type of law, though payments were low and often difficult to collect. As time and a more capitalistic, market-based economy developed the cases shifted to more corporate, and less personal, litigation. More money was to be had, but Steiner claims that Lincoln found it difficult to adapt to this shift. There is support for this belief, but Steiner doesn't spend much time developing it beyond merely stating it as true.

Overall, this book provides an excellent, in-depth evaluation of Lincoln's law career and its growth, with specific analysis of several areas of legal practice. The book is short (only 177 pages of text, plus nearly 100 more of endnotes and bibliography) but sometimes reads like a legal brief. Therefore, it's not something the average general reader will find compelling. But as a scholastic resource it is one of the best for this topic.

[MIKE Watkins Jr.]

A very informal book. Mark brings out that while the political career of Lincoln was legendary, the legal career of Lincoln was actually quite ordinary. Additionally, Mark brings out how this idea that Lincoln was an "idealistic lawyer" who didn't take fees, fought exclusively for the poor, and only took on cases that were morally right or at the very least he was personally passionate about....is actually false.

Lincoln was a Whig and what you could call an "antebellum lawyer". In other words, a lawyer that wasn't "picky" about clients they would represent. For example, Lincoln represented a slave owner, trying to recover slaves, even though "he believed slavery was morally wrong but constitutionally protected".

"Lincoln would bitterly criticize the logical conclusion of the Dred Scott Decision: "what Dred Scott's master might lawfully do with Dred Scott, in the free state of Illinois, every other master may lawfully do with any other one, or one thousand slaves, in the free state of Illinois." But in charleston in 1847 Lincoln was allied with a lawyer whose argument, if successful, could have made Illinois a slave state.

Another example is Lincoln's handling of railroad cases. Lincoln was "pro railroads" attesting to their ability to move products across great distances, even proclaiming that travel/transport by railroad "would be the future". But Lincoln represented citizens suing railroads for battery, assault, or financial compensation as much as he represented railroad companies.

"Lincoln as a Whig politician favored a developmental economic agenda, but Lincoln as a Whig lawyer did not advance that agenda every time he entered a courtroom."

In fact, Lincoln would often argue against a precedent set by himself in a previous case where he argued the other side for another client! In other words, when Lincoln would win a case...he would often "lose a case" that he litigated and won years or even just months before. Lincoln would formulate arguments to take down his own arguments manifested in the form of a precedent he set previously.


This was a very informational book that I enjoyed diving into. The only reason I'm giving this book a 3/5 is that it wasn't the most entertaining read in the world and kind of dry at times. Beyond being dry...I felt like the book at times would emphasize the context around a case Lincoln tried more so than the case itself (like the Slavery case I mentioned earlier). Maybe this is done in part, Mark brings this out early on in the book, that even with all the technology at our disposal we still have limited information of Lincoln in the court room.

[Michael Reilly]

This 2009 book was the first to use the Lincoln Legal Papers Project as the basis for an analytical summary of Lincoln's legal career. For example, Steiner supports the idea that debt collection was the biggest part of Lincoln's case load by recording that of the approximately 3400 cases handled during the 17 years of the Lincoln and Herndon firm, Lincoln represented creditors 1319 times and debtors 713 times.

Steiner's theme is that Lincoln was a "Whig Lawyer". Whigs were in favor of economic development, internal improvements, market capitalism and protective tariffs. At the same time, he was not an activist or cause lawyer. He represented pretty much anyone. He did very profitable legal work for railroads, but he also sued railroads frequently. He defended and sued large corporations.

Lincoln saw a lawyer as an advisor, not a hired gun. Steiner argues that "Lincoln was not temperamentally suited to the new style of lawyering associated with the rise of capitalism." He gives examples of out of state firms who were unhappy with Lincoln because he would not simply carry out instructions from corporate counsel. He would argue and disagree.

This book has the most detailed and considered discussion of the Matson case which I have seen. In that case Lincoln represented a slaveholder attempting to return one of his slaves to Kentucky. As Steiner notes, "For many Lincoln admirers, the case is unsettling.".

Steiner clearly explains the law of slavery. If Matson was traveling through Illinois, his slaves remained slaves. If the slaves were relocated in Illinois, they became free. In this case the slave, Jane Bryant, had been working for two years with her husband on a farm in Illinois which was owned by Matson. Matson argued that it was always his attention to have her return to Kentucky. When she refused to return, he had her arrested as a runaway slave.

Steiner outlines the complicated relationship between the Norhtwest Ordinance, which outlawed slavery in Illinois and the Fugitive Slave Acct which required Illinois courts to assist in the return of runaway slaves.

Steiner has a very nuanced discussion about the ethical issue of whether a Lawyer should represent someone he disagrees with. Lincoln clearly believed that he did not have to agree with a client to represent him, but he seemed to try to avoid getting into cases where he thought his client was in the wrong. Matson was not a case where no other lawyer would represent Matson. Steiner argues that Lincoln's involvement with the case shows "the corrupting influence of a legal ethic that minimized moral responsibility."

This is a sophisticated look at Lincoln as a lawyer. Steiner is very good at putting Lincoln into the context of his legal world.