Division and Discord: The Supreme Court Under Stone and
Vinson, 1941-1953 by Melvin I. Urofsky. Columbia, SC: University of
South Carolina Press, 1997. 314 pp. Cloth. $39.95.

Review by Harold J. Spaeth, Department of Political Science,
Michigan State University.
 

This book is a conventional history of the Stone and Vinson

Courts. It is one of a series on Chief Justiceships of the U.S.

Supreme Court under the general editorship of Herbert A. Johnson.

For those unacquainted with this period or for those who want a

convenient reference, Urofsky's work is adequate. Although the

author references his material to the full range of existing

legal and historical sources -- including the private papers of

Black, Burton, Douglas, Frankfurter, Jackson, Reed, Rutledge, and

Stone -- he totally omits scientific work from his purview. One

perhaps should not expect more from a constitutional historian.

But the price, of course, is a rehash. Urofsky merely recounts

the story of these two Courts without the benefit of a new or

fresh analysis.

Given its limited focus, the book contains little about which

to cavil. Urofsky opens his preface with the statement that "The

period between the great Constitutional crisis of 1937 and the

ascension of Earl Warren to the chief justiceship in 1937 is not

one that has received a great deal of attention." Excluding the

basically hagiographic biographies, one can point to Pritchett's

two books and that of Palmer as evidence to the contrary.

Urofsky, however, appears to have no particular axe to

grind. He is willing to make unflattering references to his

subjects, Frankfurter especially. Thus, "Like his friend and

ally, William O. Douglas, Black had little use for precedent" (p.

17); Frankfurter's rage at the failure of the other justices to

follow his lead often turned splenetic. . . . Frankfurter

sometimes addressed Murphy as 'Dear God'" (p. 34); "Within the

Court, Frankfurter's temper grew shorter and his invective more

vitriolic. He began to talk about 'enemies' on the bench . . .

He referred derisively to Black, Douglas, and Murphy as 'the

Axis'" (p. 40); "By the end of the war the normal level of polite

give-and-take within the Court had been poisoned by the ongoing

feuding among Frankfurter, Roberts, and Jackson on one side and

Black, Douglas, and Murphy on the other" (p. 137).

Urofsky begins his chronicle with brief characterizations of

the Stone Court justices. He follows it with chapters on the

Court at war, the expansion of individual rights, the federal

system, the transition from war to peace, the Cold War, rights of

labor, incorporation and due process, and the road to Brown. Of

these, I found the chapter on the federal system the best.

Brandeis' labors to lessen the incidence of forum shopping

finally bore fruit in Erie Railroad v. Tompkins (1938). On the

other hand, Erie's impact has subsequently been vitiated by

federal statutes that have superseded state laws in many areas

and by state adoption of proposals by the Commission on Uniform

State Laws, most notably the UCC. Urofsky also nicely treats the

Court's application of the full faith and credit clause to the

quickie divorces of Nevada and Florida.

In sum, this well-written book has utility for students and

lay persons curious about the history of the Stone and Vinson

Courts. Its value for political scientists is, however, minimal.
 

REFERENCES

ERIE RAILROAD V. TOMPKINS. 1938. 304 U.S. 64.
Palmer, Jan. 1990. THE VINSON COURT ERA. New York: AMS Press.
Pritchett, C. Herman. 1948. THE ROOSEVELT COURT. New York: Macmillan.
_______. 1954. CIVIL LIBERTIES AND THE VINSON COURT. Chicago:University of
Chicago.