Mr.Webster did not often transcend the proper limits of purely legal discussion in the courts, and yet even when the question was wholly legal, the court-room would be crowded by ladies as well as gentlemen, to hear him speak.

It was so at the hearing of the Girard suit; and during the strictly legal arguments in the Charles River Bridge case, the court-room, Judge Story says, was filled with a brilliant audience, including many ladies, and he adds that "Webster's closing reply was in his best manner, but with a little too much _fierte_ here and there." The ability to attract such audiences gives an idea of the impressiveness of his manner and of the beauty of his voice and delivery better than anything else, for these qualities alone could have drawn the general public and held their attention to the cold and dry discussion of laws and constitutions.
There is a little anecdote told by Mr.Curtis in connection with this Rhode Island case, which illustrates very well two striking qualities in Mr.
Webster as a lawyer.

The counsel in the court below had been assisted by a clever young lawyer named Bosworth, who had elaborated a point which he thought very important, but which his seniors rejected.

Mr.Bosworth was sent to Washington to instruct Mr.Webster as to the cause, and, after he had gone through the case, Mr.Webster asked if that was all.

Mr.Bosworth modestly replied that there was another view of his own which his seniors had rejected, and then stated it briefly.