"Thereupon a writ of error was sued out by the original plaintiffs, to remove the cause to the Supreme Court of the United States, where it was entered at the term of the court holden at Washington on the first Monday of February, 1818. "The cause came on for argument on the 10th day of March 1818, before all the judges. It was argued by Mr. Webster and Mr. Hopkinson, for the plaintiffs in error, and by Mr. Holmes and the Attorney-general (Wirt), for the defendant in error. "At the term of the court holden in February, 1819, the opinion of the judges was delivered by Chief Justice Marshall, declaring the acts of the Legislature unconstitutional and invalid, and reversing the judgment of the State court. The court, with the exception of Mr. Justice Duvall, were unanimous." The arguments in the New Hampshire court by Messrs. Mason, Smith, and Webster for the college, and Messrs. Sullivan and Bartlett for Mr. Woodward; the decision of that court, and the cause in the Supreme Court of the United States, are an important part of our country's judicial history. The result was logically based upon prior decisions of the Supreme Court. We invite special attention to one point in Mr. Webster's argument. If, in the lapse of time, under the strong light of careful research or elaborate criticism, all the other brilliant colors of this remarkable fabric shall fade or vanish, this central figure will remain forever, to illustrate the relations of the college to the State. "The State of Vermont is a principal donor to Dartmouth College. The lands given lie in that State. This appears in the special verdict. Is Vermont to be considered as having intended a gift to the State of New Hampshire in this case, as, it has been said, is to be the reasonable construction of all donations to the college? The Legislature of New Hampshire affects to represent the public, and therefore claims a right to control all property destined to public use. What hinders Vermont from considering herself equally the representative of the public, and from resuming her grants, at her own pleasure? Her right to do so is less doubtful than the power of New Hampshire to pass the laws in question." Thus closed one of the most important contests in the history of American jurisprudence. Law, politics, literature, and religion combined to make it a subject of national concern. The decision gave to a large class of chartered institutions a security never enjoyed before. The lapse of more than half a century enables us to consider the question calmly and candidly, uninfluenced by interest, prejudice, or passion.