The power of removal was incident to that duty, and might often be requisite to fulfill it.

This is a bill passed by Congress in time of peace.

I submit to Congress whether this measure is not in its whole character, scope, and object without precedent and without authority.

I know no other way in which they can be preserved and maintained except by a constant adherence to them through the various vicissitudes of national existence, with such adaptations as may become necessary, always to be effected, however…

To pronounce the supreme lawmaking power of an established state illegal is to say that law itself is unlawful.

I am unable to give it my assent, for reasons so grave that I hope a statement of them may have some influence on the minds of the patriotic and enlightened men with whom the decision must ultimately rest.

It should induce us to pause in a course of legislation which, looking solely to the attainment of political ends, fails to consider the rights it transgresses, the law which it violates, or the institutions which it imperils.

The bill in this respect conflicts, in my judgment, with the Constitution of the United States.

It reduces the whole population of the ten States--all persons, of every color, sex, and condition, and every stranger within their limits--to the most abject and degrading slavery.

The bill, however, would seem to show upon its face that the establishment of peace and good order is not its real object.

The subject was long and earnestly debated in the Senate, and the early construction of the Constitution was, nevertheless, freely accepted as binding and conclusive upon Congress.