Briefly stated, the argument was that the college was an institution founded by private persons for particular uses; that the charter was given to perpetuate such uses; that misconduct of the trustees was a question for the courts, and that the Legislature, by its interference, transcended its powers.

To these general principles, strengthened by particular clauses in the Constitution of New Hampshire, the counsel for the college trusted for victory.

The theory of impairing the obligation of contracts they introduced, but they did not insist on it, or hope for much from it.

On this point, however, and, of course, on this alone, the case went up to the Supreme Court.

In December, 1817, Mr.
Webster wrote to Mr.Mason, regretting that the case went up on "one point only." He occupied himself at this time in devising cases which should raise what he considered the really vital points, and which, coming within the jurisdiction of the United States, could be taken to the Circuit Court, and thence to the Supreme Court at Washington.