i have great respect for professor finkelman as a historian of slavery, but he reaches the conclusionhat there are all of these slaves based on the fact that at some point he found conveyances showing that marshall gave to his children up to, i think, 130 slaves or something like that. he projects from that that there were these other slaves, and marshall must have owned a secret plantation that no biographer of marshall has ever heard of, there is no record of in of his writings, no evidence of income or expenses for this plantation. it is a bit of a mystery to me. i think the more substantial issue he raises in his book is that marshall decided a number of cases brought by slaves against slaveholders in favor of the slaveholders. finkelman argues, and it is inconsistent with my view and other marshall biographers that marshall was anti-slavery. the cases he was referring to were cases where, for example, a slaveholder had failed to register the names of slaves with proper authorities. the slaves argued, therefore i must not be a slave. the question was, what is the appropriate remed