In the majority opinion for this case the Supreme Court first ruled that the plaintiff, referred to several times as an "eelemosynary" institution, was a private corporation which could not be subjected to meddling by the legislature.
In the majority opinion for this case the Supreme Court first ruled that the plaintiff, referred to several times as an "eelemosynary" institution, was a private corporation which could not be subjected to meddling by the legislature. This was a de facto victory for the plaintiff which was then bolstered by acknowledging that the Royal Charter in essence consisted of a contract between the government and the plaintiff which, according to Article I secion 10, could not be impaired by the actions of a state, in this case New Hampshire.  This is a summary of Chief Justice John Marshall's ruling in, FTP, what 1819 case argued by Daniel Webster on behalf of a college which claimed the right to appoint its own governing body independent of the action of the state to modify it?
In the majority opinion for this case the Supreme Court first ruled that the plaintiff, referred to several times as an "eelemosynary" institution, was a private corporation which could not be subjected to meddling by the legislature.
The Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward