As a local history buff, I was pleased to encounter this book at the bookstore. Professor Madison does a nice job outlining Indiana's history in a way that the average arm-chair historian can understand without any difficulty whatsoever. The first section is devoted to the land and the early people who inhabited the land. He does a great job getting the geographical history down in a concise manner. It's easy to ramble about the topic, but Madison does a nice job of being brief, but also impeccable with content. He covers all the bases.
I particulary enjoy the social history, which talks about race-relations and also about people who helped form the State.

Most major events in American History are taken from the Hoosier perspective as well. While reading, you can tell that Madison has a particular love for the State of Indiana. He writes about it in such a way that demonstrates his admiration for the early settlers, but also he looks at them from a realistic point of view. He does not write history from rose-colored glasses, and writes in a honest and refreshing sort of way.

My only complaint would be that there needs to be more pictures. I do have to add that the photos included are obviously carefully selected, as they make silent statements in themselves. For example, the one of Klan members exiting a church in rural Knox, Indiana, or the one of a one-room delapitated school house in northern Clinton Co. He did a great job in selecting appropriate photos... I only wish there were more.

I took Indiana History at Indiana University from Dr. Madison and I loved the class. THE INDIANA WAY complimented the lectures very well. I learned a new thing from each chapter. Did you know that George Rogers Clark was an indian scalper? Did you know that the Confederates crossed the Ohio River during the Civil War? Did you know that in the 1920s the KKK had the governor in their pocket? Did you know that Wendell Willkie and Paul V. McNutt were in the same graduating class at Indiana University? I did not know these things before reading THE INDIANA WAY, and I cannot wait for the second edition to come out.

I felt that the treatment this author afforded the victim Mary Ball was akin to raping her all over again. He uses the term alleged in front of the crimes against her but does not employ the same qualifier before mention of the crimes committed against the male victim. The author repeats rumors that Miss Ball had loose morals and that (gasp) she sometimes didn't wear underwear! Obviously, if she dressed like that she had it coming, right? He did not, apparently, attempt to speak with anyone with a more favorable impression of Miss Ball in order to present a more balanced picture. Finally, at the end, he presents a touching picture of a reconcilliation between James Cameron and the murdered man's surviving brother but Mary Ball has disappeared from the author's work by this point. She has become an invisible woman. I for one would like to know how she felt at this point, to hear her words. Although the book had it's places the good professor has done a terrible thing to Mary Ball and for that he should be ashamed.

James H. Madison has provided us with a book about an incident that no one wants to know about - a bit of ugly history that we would rather not think, much less READ, about. A LYNCHING IN THE HEARTLAND: Race and Memory in America is a brilliant investigation and commentary on the heinous incident on August 7, 1930 in Marion, Indiana. On that quiet night in the quiet heartland of America, far removed from the South with its long-standing history of racial clashes, two African American men were snatched from the jail by white mob frenzy and hung from a tree for the 'dastardly deed' of murder and rape of a white couple. No trial, no conviction, just an acting out of racial hatred, an act captured in the most famous photograph of a lynching in the American context. Madison reports the events factually with a mesmerizingly accurate attention to detail. But the story does not stop there. Madison has researched the history prior to the incident and the subsequent followup that identified brilliant African American leaders and challengers, one of whom was the third man not lynched on that hideous evening in 1930 - James Cameron. Madison then reflects on the whole history of racism in this country, beginning with the equally offensive murders and tortures of the American Indians and extending down to extant incidences up to the time of the publication of this valuable, disturbing book.

Madison repeatedly makes the point that if we don't study our history and vividly recall our past then we are doomed to persist in unjust racial crimes. This is a tough book to swallow, but a very important one for all of us to read. Only by exposing ourselves to the ugly events of our history can we hope to learn and prevent such madness from recurring. An eloquent, vital, and impressive contribution.

In August of 1930, a lynching took place. It would not be uncommon for one to assume that the lynching took place in the deep south, but in this instance, the assumption would be incorrect. The lynchings of Tom Shipp and Abe Smith took place in Marion, Indiana, America's Heartland. This event is responsible for one of the most famous photographs of an American lynching.

The author demonstrates how stereotypes and fear contributed to the lynching. The mere suggestion that a White woman was raped and a White man was murdered by three Black men, provided enough inspiration to turn a normally cordial, if not friendly, small town into a lynch mob. Madison outlines how a community dealt with the chilling reality that such mob violence had taken place in their small town. Because of shame, guilt and even fear, this tragic event was buried in Marion, Indiana's collective memory.

Flossie Bailey, a prominent African American woman in the community, as well as others, worked hard to mobilize the community in an attempt to make sure that at least some of the people involved in the murders would be held responsible for the crimes while fear kept other African Americans in the community quiet. Unfortunately, no one was held responsible for the crime.

Madison also highlights the history behind what is considered by many to be the most famous lynching photograph in American history. The photograph, taken by Lawrence Beitler the night of the lynching, has been reproduced and widely circulated. During the time immediately following the lynching, some people bought copies to serve as a "trophy", while others felt it was an abomination. It is a stirring photograph that depicts two dead men hanging from a tree while crowds of White's stand around some in their Sunday best, some pointing, and some chatting and laughing.

This book begins with a vivid and chilling description of the events leading up to the lynching, the lynching itself and the events that followed. The description of the scene was a result of the author's extensive research which included interviews, reviewing court documents, magazines, books and other historical archives. Although the author noted that his initial goal was to write an article about the event, he quickly learned that the story of this lynching was much bigger than what could be captured in an article. In addition to the actual description of the events surrounding the lynching, the author creates a historical context by providing a description of life for both African Americans and Whites during the era. He details the role that the NAACP and committed community leaders played in fighting for broader civil rights for African Americans.

He ends the book with a story of healing. On the night of the lynching, three men were in jail awaiting trial, yet only two of them were lynched. The third man, James Cameron's life was spared, and eventually Cameron began to share his story with the world. His goal in sharing the story was to promote racial healing and unity. This book touches on an area of American history that is often buried and rarely talked about. Through the author's research he is able to share a story that demonstrates just how far we as a Nation have come, and I highly recommend this book.

Reviewed by Stacey Seay

Before reading this work, I looked upon it as very promising. Read, in contrast the vast majority of other historians of the era, proposes to analyze and contrast the political philosophies of four major early Americans by examining their views on the relationship between power and liberty. Thus, the author is also in effect transcending the trite republicanism/liberalism dichotomy that has domincated scholarship for decades by returning to the methodology used by the great Bernard Bailyn. Unfortunately, the author ultimately fails to execute.

Madison is the first thinker that he discusses, and along with the chapter on Wilson, this is the highlight of the book. He effectively argues that Madison was a much more consistent thinker than past scholars have made him out to be. While Madison's transformation from an ally to Hamilton during the Constitutional Convention to a strong opponent several years later has long puzzled historians, Read demonstrates the consistenty that he maintained in both positions as related through his interpretation of the Constitution and the public's understanding and perception of it. In addition to this, he also undertakes the strangely neglected task of comparing Madison with Hamilton. This however, leads the first major downfall of the study, viz. his unsound analysis of Hamilton.

To begin with, even the subtitle of this chapter is enough to arouse one's suspicions. Hamilton is characterized as a "Libertarian and nationalist." The later appelation is certainly undisputable, but the former is clearly absurd to anyone who has any idea what libertarianism actually entails. Throughout the chaper, Hamilton's supposed commitment to liberty and other traditional Whig or republican principles is given far too much emphasis with far too little substantive evidence. Along with this, Hamilton's views on Constitional and economic policy are given a shallow, sympathetic treatment, while other aspects of his life and thought are either ignored or merely glossed over. This of course, largely serves to vitiate the very promising contrast of Hamilton with Madison that he conducts.

Nevertheless, the chapter on James Wilson is quite valuable, especially since he, unlike the other 3 figures dealt with, has been prodominantly ignored by modern scholars. He shows that while Wilson was as committed to the concept of popular sovreignty as Thomas Jefferson, he believed that the proper manner to systemize this was primarily through the Federal government. Hence, Wilson, like Hamilton, was a proponent of "energetic government," because he viewed it as the proper systemization of the "energy" of the sovereign people.

Although the chaper on Hamilton was bad, that dealing with Jefferson is worse. Read, quite correctly, recognizes throughout the work that Jefferson, (unlike Madison, Hamilton, and Wilson) viewed power and liberty as polar opposites, with every increase of power entailing a proportionate decrease in liberty. T Surprisingly , however, his actual analysis of his thought is among the worst that I have ever read. He seems to make a concerted effort to make his political philosophy as nebulous and contradictory as possible. Moreover, while he cites David N. Mayer's invaluable work on Jefferson's Constitutional thought, and even states that fellow scholar Michael Zuckert helped him with the work; he utilizes the flawed and inaccurate work of Lance Banning and Richard Matthews. As a result of this, he takes up the absurd contention that Jefferson was an agrarian who opposed capitalism, and thus Hamilton and his radical vision for a new economic order.

This view, in addition to being completely unfounded, also highlights the paucity of Read's sources. Such important works as Joyce Appleby's "Capitalism & A New Social Order" and Garret Sheldon's "The Political Philosophy of Thomas Jefferson" are completely ignored.

While the analysis of Jefferson's thought is dramatically poor, perhaps the worst aspect of the work is the author's translation of views of each thinker to the politcal landscape of the late 20th century. For the first three thinkers, he manages to claim that their theories may actually be able to fit modern day circumstances. Jefferson, however, is excluded from this, given his radical views on power. In each case, he uses the common statist platitude that convictions formulated two centuries ago cannot apply to issues out of their temporal context. In the case of all of these men, even Hamilton, this argument is patently absurd, as their adherence to the principals of natural rights and liberty certainly make clear. As Jefferson once said, Nothing...is unchangeable but the inherent and unalienable rights of man." Consideration of this, among other Founding principles, has led even as staunch a Hamiltonian as Forrest McDonald to conclude the Founding Fathers would look upon the current government as tyrannical. As should be obvious, I view this work as very deeply flawed. Nevertheless, given the proper author utilizing the same methodology, this could have been a truly fascinating and valuable piece of scholarship.

Recent scholarship has revealed a much more consistent 'Madison' than some historians have granted 'The Father of the Constitution'.Scholars Rosen, Banning, and Rakove have lead the way in this regard. Reads contribution although brief is as Rakove pointed out a deft work.By highlighting the concerns Madison held about the excresent powers of the Continental Congress, amidst the environment where the Congress was frustrated from performing the assigned tasks, revitalizes and reinforces the devotion Madison held for Constituional integrity reconciling the thoughts and actions of Madison in the 1780s, to the 1790s. It is only wished this essay could be expanded, and that the author could apply a more expanded study on Madison's contributions.

Dr. James Read was a recent guest on National Public Radio. His scholarship is evident, but what he has written here is a very "user-friendly" exploration of the early American debate on the role of government, which is as pertinent today as it was in 1776.
Dr. James Read has given us a highly readable, as well as well researched, look at a question which all Americans ponder: "Is big government antagonistic to individual rights and liberties?" The discussion is framed in the context of those early American thinkers who initially set up the American system of government with an especial emphasis on Jefferson and Hamilton.
This is a very readable book that is written in straightforward prose. It presents a nice, concise history of America's early philosophical public policy issues, its greatest thinkers, and the debate in the 18th century about what form the American government would take. It is fascinating to read about the debates taking place in the hammering out of the United States' Constitution.
The book is organized into:
Power and Liberty (James Madison);
Libertarianism and nationalism (Alexander Hamilton);
Popular Sovereighty (James Wilson);
Liberty and States Rights (Thomas Jefferson).