Book Reviews

ISSAC WILLIAM MARTIN, AJAY K. MEHROTRA, and MONICA PRASAD

(eds.). The New Fiscal Sacialogy: Taxation in Comparative and
Historical Perspective. New York: Cambridge University Press,

Downloaded from http://ajlh.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on October 10, 2016

2009.328 pages. $99.00 (cloth); $55.00 (paper).

This useful book is a compendium of essays written by some

very smart folks who have asked some very interesting questions
about tax systems across both time and culture. Their essays pres-
ent summaries of their work, giving readers a good sense of what
is "out there" regarding current thinking about issues of tax
administration from a variety of scholarly viewpoints and traditions:
sociology, history, economics, and law. For example, I was delighted
to discover extensive references to a substantial body of work on
cognitive biases in tax administration, and so I sent the book to a
colleague of mine at another law school who is interested to see
how tax laws are written to affect taxpayer perceptions.
The book arose from a symposium held at Northwestern Uni-
versity in 2007. Most of the essays are enlightening forays into dif-
ferent aspects of tax administration and will give value to readers
from all disciplines. Thus, readers will find interesting history: a re-
view of tax administration in the American colonies; an account of
the attempt after WWII to reform Japan's tax system; and the story
of one tax reform effort under Franklin Roosevelt. Readers will also
find: useful sketches of taxation by modern African states; essays
on contemporary political rhetoric about taxation; a good exposi-
tion of why the American income tax system contains a "marriage
penalty" and a "singles penalty"; and ruminations on the connec-
tions between taxation and democracy.
The editors present the substantive essays in three groups,
bracketed by an introductory chapter and an "epilogue." The group-
ing is not intuitive and I would suggest the interested reader not
138 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL HISTORY Vol. 52

pause too long over it . For example, the editors say that Part I "ex-
amines the sourcesof the fiscal-social contract from the point of view
of one of the contracting parties, the state" and that Part II "exam-
ines the origins of the fiscal contract from the point of view of the
taxpayer." So I was confused to find in Part I an essay titled "What
Americans Think of Taxes." It presented a very interesting report
on historical trends in public opinion about taxation, sliced and
diced in various statistical ways to support the thesis that " ordinary
Americans have been sensitive to the level of taxes they pay." To

Downloaded from http://ajlh.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on October 10, 2016

my naive eye, that looks like it belonged in Part II. In short, I did not
see how the organization of the book added value to this essay's
subject; it would be equally interesting regardless of what essays
came before or after it.
I believe the organization of the book is part of the editors' at-
tempt to persuade the reader of a new scholarly discipline they label
"fiscal sociology." According to the Cambridge University Press
blurb, the authors "offer a state-of-the -art survey of the new fiscal
sociology." The editors pitch this " new fiscal sociology" as a "signif-
icant intellectual breakthrough ." They give a quick and dirty intel -
lectual history of the study of taxation to support their claim but
their conclusion appears a bit of a stretch : "[w]hat is new about the
new fiscal sociology is its recognition that taxation has a theoretical
or causal-and not just a symptomatic or methodological-impor-
tance ." I honestly do not understand that claim . Importance for
what? Causal for what? Etc. Similarly, the epilogue claims, "Hence,
fiscal sociology has much to offer both political and economic soci-
ology. The same is true for the sociology of law." Again, I cannot
make heads or tails of that claim, partly because the writing is so
opaque. Does the writer mean that fiscal sociology has much to
offer sociology of law or that the sociology of law has much to offer
both political and economic sociology?
I had similar reactions to much of the writing in the book: many
of the essays contained extremely broad conclusions and sweeping
generalizations that one simply must not pause over too long or
else they will diminish that which is useful. That is why I say the es-
says are best read as summaries of their authors' other works . For
example, in the essay on colonial American tax systems I kept get-
ting distracted by the author's seemingly gratuitous swipes at
Thomas Jefferson. I kept wondering why that author was so down
2012 BOOK REVIEWS 139

on Jefferson. One cannot find any clue in this short essaybut must
instead refer to her books on colonial slavery and taxation for a
fuller and more open argument that has led her to her views. The
essay in this volume just assumes that the reader has either read
those materials, agrees with the author, or does not care. In short,
like any other book, one must read critically.
The essays pretty much stand alone . That is, they do not build
on one another. Sure, they make references to each other-kind
of like friendly waves from one ship passing another. But just be-

Downloaded from http://ajlh.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on October 10, 2016

cause they acknowledge each other and just because almost all the
authors, somewhat tiresomely, use the same "thunder of history"
quote from the early 20th century scholar Joseph Schumpeter, does
not make this collection a new "discipline."
One can doubt the existence of any "new" fiscal sociology, how-
ever, without taking away from the substance of the essays, or of
the idea that the study of taxing systems and tax administration is
deeply connected to the broader concerns of all scholars about
human purpose and organization. So is the study of water, for that
matter. Yet there is no University "Department of Water" that
brings together all those who study the social significance of water,
the law of water, the history of water, or the economics of water.
Likewise, I won't look for a "Department of Fiscal Sociology" soon.
But I will keep this book around for reference.

BRYAN CAMP
Texas Tech University

BRIAN McGINTY. Lincoln and the Court. Cambridge, MA: Harvard

University Press, 2008. 384 pp. $27.95 (cloth); $18.95 (paper) .

In Dred Scott v. Sandford, the Supreme Court held that mem-

bers of the "negro African race" could not be citizens of the United
States, and that Congress could not prohibit slavery in the territo-
ries. The decision was handed down four years before Abraham lin-
coln became president, but Brian McGinty discusses it in Lincoln
and the Court, perhaps because, as he writes (p. 63), "there can be
little doubt that [Chief Justice Roger] Taney's 1857 decision made a