Thus, Sir, it is apparent that Parliamentary Law is completely in harmony with Natural Law.

We have already seen, by the opinions of eminent judges, great masters of law in different ages, that what is contrary to the principles of Natural Law must be void; and English judges tell us that even an Act of Parliament must be treated…

Is not the true remedy by amending the journal so as to strike out his name?

Can Senators sit here and allow one of their number, on an important occasion, to come forward and play at the same time the two great parts, party and judge?

Therefore I ask that the journal be rectified, in harmony with Parliamentary Law and the principles of Universal Law.

In making this motion, I have no other motive than to protect the rights of the Senate, and to establish those principles of justice which will be a benefit to our country for all time.

You abandon your duty, if you allow an elementary principle of justice to be set at nought in this Chamber.

Be it, Sir, our pride to uphold those truths and to stand by those principles.

I believe that at any day any Senator might rise in his place and move to expunge from the journal a record in itself derogatory to the body.

I believe, as I said before, that the Senator from New Jersey is entitled to his seat; but I do not believe that he is entitled to hold his seat by his own vote.

We must rely, not upon his honor, but upon the Constitution, interpreted by this body and fixed beyond recall.

We all know that the Supreme Court is now some three years behind in its business, and the practical question is, How are we to bring relief?

Another, and to my mind the better way, would be to allow appeals substantially as now, but to limit the court to the exclusive hearing of those appeals.

Justice has been administered to the satisfaction of the country, reasonably at least, under this system.

But now we are driven to a pass: justice threatens to fail in the Supreme Court, unless we provide relief.

I am disposed to believe that the only real relief will be found in setting apart the judges of our highest court exclusively for the consideration of appeals.

I fear it does not; and I really should be much better satisfied, if my friend from New York had dealt more boldly with the whole question by providing a court of appeal, composed of the eminent judges of the land, devoted exclusively to…

From opposite camps we meet to bury the dead.

With a sentiment of gratitude I look back upon our relations, never from the beginning impaired or darkened by difference.

I make haste also to declare my sense of his personal purity and his incorruptible nature.

Such elements of character, exhibited and proved throughout a long service, render him an example for all.

He is gone; but these virtues “smell sweet and blossom in the dust.

He was excellent also in speech; so that, whenever he spoke, the wonder was that he who spoke so well should speak so seldom.

He was full, clear, direct, emphatic, and never was diverted from the thread of his argument.

Alas! as we listened to that most elaborate eulogy, shaped by study and penetrated by feeling, how little did we think that it was so soon to be echoed back from his own tomb!