The examiner. [volume] (Louisville, Ky.) 1847-1849, 1848-02-26
Theughts on E.snAn q &c pm lion. No. Is.

A great deal has been said, both in the
North and in the South, in reference to the
Wilmot Proviso. Some have spoken OF it
in terms Of high conmendaiion--others with
indifierence-aDd Others have denounced ii
as a great abomination, justifying the appli-
cation OF the most vituperatIve epithets 10 its
author. And what is the nature Of this pro-
viso, about which, so much has been said
and writtenl What does it propose? Simply
this That whatever Territory may be an
nexed TO this Union shall come in as free
and not as slave Territory. This is the
substance Of the Wilmot Proviso. Is there
anything wrong in it! Should Wilmot feel
any regret that he has offered it for the con-
sideration and action OF Congress? He ought
to consider the day on which he presented il
as the most memorable day of bis political
life. He ought even now to feel an exalted
satisfaction that his name is so identified with
this Proviso, that the future historian ofthese
United States will record them together
What lu1ta-position Precisely such as
a philanthropic heart would wish. Who
would not have posterty to find his name
in the records Of anti-slavery.
But to notice this Proviso more particrl-
larly. 1t is argued by some that il would
be a violation of the spirit Of the Constitu-
tion of the United States for Congress to
adopt it, The fact is the trainers of the
Constitution did not contemplate the annexa-
ton of Territory to the Union by purchase
or conquest. Ii seems that the men of revo-
lutionary memory were not capable Of TAX
ing as enlarged views of things as some Of
the politicians Of this degenerate age II
is well known that MIR. jefferson questioned
the constitutionslity OF the purchase Of
Louisiana. He wished to make the acqui-
silion, and at one time was anxious for the
Constitution to be so amended as TO give the
requisite authority. The Constitution, how.
ever, was not amended; but Louisiana was
purchased Of the French---a fact which fur.
nishes sufficient basis for the allegation,
that MIR. Jefferson, though an avowed, strict
constructionist, was in fact more liberal
constructionist than either Of his predeces
sors. But enough, in reference to Louisiana
and Mr.. Jefferson.
1t will, perhaps, be admitted by all, tina
the authors Of the Constitution never had il
view any such romantic project as the con
quest and annexation Of Mexican Territory
But suppose Mexican Territory is 10 be an
nexed. And at present there is probabl
lily of this amounting almost to certainty
Upon what terms is it to. be annexed
The writer believes that Congress should
without hesitation, apply to it the Wilmo
Proviso. IL there be authority to annex a
all, there is authority to adopt this Provlso
| know il is said that slavery is subjec
over which Congress has no control-tha
it belongs TO State jurisdiction, DC. IL
this view do not object. But in the Ian
guage ofthe Constitution, State and Terri
/ tory are, by no means, Identical terms
Congress must possess power IN Territories
which II does not possess in States, for The
very good reason, that, after the formation
States, there is division Of power between
the General and the State Governments