energy and mental control. When his ar gument ended, jurors or judges or adversary would seem to notice what immense force remained; the engine had easily performed its work, but there was power remaining for any further onward movement. On August 12, 181 2, he was gazetted by governor and council as Attorney-General of the State. In six years after coming to the bar, friendless and against jealous oppo sition, Mr. Emmet had won the highest professional prize. He proved to be an able officer and reliable counsel to the State. In managing a murder case where in great knowledge of toxicology became necessary, inasmuch as the means used for the crime were by poison, his medical knowledge proved of especial service. But the salary of the Attorney-General was small, and the duties confining. He was obliged to be much of the time at the State capital, while dwelling in New York City. His practice had grown to net him ten thousand dollars a year — a snug income then, for it was not the era of large corpo rations and trusts full of business and mu nificent with fees. After, therefore, not quite two years of official life, he resigned, and fully returned to private practice. How extended this was throughout the next dec ade abundantly appears from the later Johnson Reports and the earlier ones of Wendell. The United States Supreme Court re ports also show that he was retained in it for many memorable cases. The most memorable one was the leading constitu tional controversy of Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheaton, page I, which is regarded in our national jurisprudence as a milestone on the highway of constitutional lore. Re spondent Ogden had been an assignee of Robert Fulton's steam plant, and of an ex clusive privilege by act of the New York legislature of navigating the waters apper taining to the Hudson River and to those portions of the bays around the lower har
bor which were in the jurisdiction of New York State. Appellant Gibbons had in the State courts sought an injunction against Ogden's assertion of his exclusive naviga tion privileges from the State — that he denominated an unconstitutional monopoly. And in support of his right to conduct a steam ferry through New York waters *o a point in New Jersey, he set up a United States navigating license to himself under due Federal statutory authority. The State courts, in giving to Ogden — Robert Ful ton's assignee — the full benefit of his legis latively awarded monopoly, brought Gib bons as appellant to the Washington court. The conflict between state rights and a paramount Federal jurisdiction of navig able waters produced widespread interest. Newspaper and legal gossip divided in opinion. But the larger number of disput ants viewed with alarm any monopoly of the then new but rapidly growing transit by steamboat. In the February term of 1824 the controversy reached the tribunal over which the great John Marshall presided, and of which Joseph Story was a junior member in company with Smith Thompson of New York, whose commission was then only a year old. Their elder associates were Bushrod Washington of Virginia, who held commission from the administration of his great namesake; William Johnson of South Carolina, Thomas Todd of Kentucky, and Gabriel Duval of Maryland — all of whom had been law students when the Fed eral Constitution went first on trial. Gib bons had retained Daniel Webster and Wil liam Wirt, and the legal rank of Thomas . Addis Emmet at that time may be well es timated, when the State of New York, whose legislative rights were in question by the controversy, retained him against those eminent jurists as aid to the private counsel of Ogden, who was the afterward eminent Chief-Justice Thomas J. Oakley of New York City. There was an immense audi ence of congressmen, lawyers and laymen
