In what may be called the strategy of the case he showed the best generalship and the most skilful management.

He also proved himself to be possessed of great tact and to be versed in the knowledge of men, qualities not usually attributed to him because their exercise involved an amount of care and painstaking foreign to his indolent and royal temperament, which almost always relied on weight and force for victory.
Mr.Webster no doubt improved in details, and made better arguments at the bar than he did upon this occasion, but the Dartmouth College case, on the whole, shows his legal talents so nearly at their best, and in such unusual variety, that it is a fit point at which to pause in order to consider some of his other great legal arguments and his position and abilities as a lawyer.

For this purpose it is quite sufficient to confine ourselves to the cases mentioned by Mr.Curtis, and to the legal arguments preserved in the collection of Mr.Webster's speeches.
Five years after the Dartmouth College decision, Mr.Webster made his famous argument in the case of Gibbons vs.Ogden.The case was called suddenly, and Mr.Webster prepared his argument in a single night of intense labor.

The facts were all before him, but he showed a readiness in arrangement only equalled by its force.

The question was whether the State of New York had a right under the Constitution to grant a monopoly of steam navigation in its waters to Fulton and Livingston.