294
THE GREEN BAG
candidate of such people with such avowed by the judges at the current term, and the opinions.1" case was taken under advisement until the The case was argued on March 7 to n, January term of 1832. At this term, on March r, 1832, Judge 1831, before Chief Justice Marshall and Jus Story wrote to Professor Ashmun: tices Joseph Story, Smith Thompson, John McLean, and Henry Baldwin, Justices "The Charlestown Bridge cases not yet Gabriel Duvall and William Johnson, being decided. Some of the judges had not pre absent. For the Charles River Bridge Daniel pared their opinions when we met; and Judge has been absent the whole term Webster appeared as counsel with Warren Johnson from indisposition. ... I may tell you, Button, the latter being one of the most confidentially, that we are greatly divided prominent of the Bridge Proprietors. For in opinion, and it is not certain what the the Warren Bridge were Walter Jones, the finale may be. Perhaps it may not be noted lawyer of the District of Columbia, and decided this term. We shall rise about the middle of March, and I shall find my wayWilliam Wirt of Maryland, who had recently home as soon as possible afterwards, so that resigned as Attorney General of the United I may relieve you from some extra duty. I States. Judge Story wrote to Professor would rather work in the Law School than here.1' Ashmun March 10: "We are now upon the Charlestown Though no definite knowledge has ever Bridge case- and have heard the opening been had of the decision reached by the court counsel on each side in three days. Dutton at this time, it seems probable that Marshall, for the plaintiffs made a capital argument Story, and a majority of the judges who had in point of matter and manner, lawyerlike, close, searching and exact; Jones on the heard the argument, had arrived at a con other side was ingenious, metaphysical, and clusion in favor of Charles River Bridge and occasionally strong and striking. Wirt goes contrary to that reached by Chief Justice on to-day and Webster will follow tomorrow. Taney and the court at the final decision of Six Judges only are present which I regret, Duvall having been called suddenly away. . ." the case made in 1837. At all events, Story had writen out his opinion as early No more important constitutional ques as November 19, 1831, for in a letter on that tion had come before the Supreme Court than day to Jeremiah Mason he wrote: that involved in this case, since the famous "I am now engaged on the Charles River steamboat case of Gibbons v. Ogden, in Bridge case. After it is finished I should be 1824. Not only was the fate of this particular glad to have you read it over if I thought it corporation involved, but the whole trend of might not give you too much trouble. It future railroad and other corporate develop is so important a constitutional question that I am anxious that some other mind ment was to hang upon the decision. should see, what the writer rarely can in his After the arguments, it was at once zeal, whether there is any weak point which evident that no agreement could be reached can be fortified or ought to be abandoned. The general structure of the argument, I 1 The Boston Daily Advertiser, of February 7, 18311 hope, is sound, but all the details may not quoting from the Bunker Hill A urora, said, " agents for be." the parties in the case have repaired to Washington to conduct the cause to its final issue before the Supreme Court now in session. General Austin left town on Thursday." The reference in Story's letter to Morton is to the fact that Marcus Morton, while still a Justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Court, was the Democratic candidate for Governor in each year from 1828 to 1834 inclusive, the Democrats being largely Warren Bridge men.
To this Mason replied, November 24. 1831: "I will most willingly examine y0ur opinion on the case you mention, and ^ give you the result of my reflections on it." On December 23, 1831, Story wrote again that illness had delayed the completion of
