Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, IA [i.e. Ind.]) 1839-1854, 1847-10-12
LETTER FROM MIR. CORWIN.
WilInOt PrOViSO.
LEBANON, 93d Septeuh

To the Editors of the Cincinnati Atlas.
Dear Sir:-'rhe various and contradictory YER
sions, given by the papers of Cincinnati, of my
remarks at Carthage touching the Wilmot Pro-
viso and another kindred topics, oblige TO state
explicitly what did say those subject the
occasion referred to.
am represented by some. as having opposed
the application Of the Wilmot Provso to any
territory which may be ceded to the nited States
By Mexico, This is not true. l stated more
tl.an once. that was opposed 10 any further ex-
tension of territorial limits at this time: but
if territory should be acquired, either by con-
quest treaty, then slavery should be forever
prohibited in such territory, or in other words,
the Wilmot Proviso should be extended to it.
| gave my for this at length, which
think cannot fail TO be inferred by every one
who chose TO give the slightest attention 10 what
! then sad.
did urge the propriety of rejecting all terri
tory at this time, as this was in my Judgmen, a
ground which the various sections of the
Union would be more likely 10 unite. than on
the Wiiinot Proviso l did pronounce the W IL
mot provisO dangerous question, and, as EN-
phaticlly as | was able l did also declare the
further acquisition of territory at this tirns dn ~
T.
for these positions were given at the time In
the event Of cession of territory by Mexico to
the L. States, the question of the further erten-
SION of slavery must arise in a form which wiz
necessarily array the North and South against
each other. Al! questions having this tendency,
l consider, in a certain sense dangerous, since
they weak these bonds of Union, which bind
toge ther the several parts of the Republic; and
I
1t in this view only, that pronounced the
Wilmot ProViso a dangerous Queston--Rut did
not insist because it was dangerous, that there
fore il should in be made u question
On the contrary, | stated. again and again, that
if, contrary to my dgment Of true policy, terri
tory should be forced upon Us, that then the Will
mot Proviso must be applied to it.
/ did prefer the ground of "No Territory"
because, amongst other reasons for that prefer
ence, thought on that ground we might succeed,
and if relied the Wmot Proviso alone in
the Senate at least, constituted, we must
fail. l think l referred TO the vote Mr.. Up
hams motion in the Senate at the last session to
introduce the Wilmot Proviso into the "I'hree
Million Bill. The vote stood for the Proviso 81
against It 81. voted for the Proviso then.
shall vote for it again whenever it can be made
applicable TO territory hereafter acquired, whe
,her it come by compact or the sword. These, l
understand to be the doctrines of the people OF
Ohio Of all parties; the same in substance en-
bodied in resolutions of instruction which passed
/ both branches of the Ohio Legislature with un-
examped unanmty at its last session.
should not now trouble you with this COM
munication, had not the papers Of your city Civ
undue Importance to the subject by connec-
ting my remarks. with the wing party in Ohio and
drawing differences from what ! said, equally
I'M ust to that party and myself
Your cbedient servant
THO. CORWIN.