The daily national Whig. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1847-1849, 1849-04-07
DAILY NATIONAL WING.
WASHINGTON, ID. &.
SATURDAY MORNING. April. I, is4s.

The Free Soil journals are everywhere
denouncing Gen. Taylor, with great feroci-
ty, for having declared, as they assert,
against the extension Of the ordinance Of
1887 over the territories Of New Mexico
and California, and when called upon for the
evidence Of this asserted declaration, they
point to some newspaper paragraph, in which
the editor takes upon himse to threaten the
Free Sellers, if they do not behave them
selves, with the old Hero's wrath, That
grave journals should so far forget what is
due to truth, if not to Gen. Taylor, as to
seize upon hastily written newspaper par
agraph and distort it into solemn declara-
ton of executive hostility against the ordl-
nance Of 1887, is to us utterly inexplicable.
There is not man in the country, who can
put his hand upon declaration Of General
Taylor's opinion upon this delicate subject,
either pro or con. The people made him
President, without requiring at his hands, in
advance, his views upon question Of so much
interest, because they had full confidence in
him, that, when the time should come for him
to act in the premises, he would act as pat
riot and wise man. How unjust, therefore,
for the Free Soil journals, to attempt to make
the General responsible for loosely word
ed newspaper paragraph, or to attribute to
him sentiments which he has never express
ed The conduct Of the Free Soil press, in
this thing, has not done it much credit in
the estimation Of considerate men It is
utterly unwarranted by the facts in the case.
Mr. Gdding's original statement, that
has led to this controversy, was carelessly
made It placed not only Gen. Taylor in q
false position, but Mr.. Giddings himself.
II asserted to be true, what Mr.. Giddings
did not know to be true-nay, could not
know to be true. The President has said
and says now, that he will not interfere in
the Legislation Of Congress either individ-
ually or officially, and because he expressed
a wish, hope, that Congress would subst-
tute law for anarchy in California, Mr.. Gid
dings accuses him Of violating his pledges, to
leave Congress to execute their duties I'M
and untrammelled That he
made no official exertion to produce the pas
sage OF lawto extend laws over California,
the Union Of yesterday clearly and fully adj
mits, after having first taken the ground
that he did make such an exertion. To
construe the expression Of mere personal
wish that given thing should be done,
into an active individual interference so as
to cause It to be done, is rather forced
view Of the subject, and one that is entirely
untenable-
The Union, for the last three days, has
been striving with all its might, on the one
hand, to fan the hostility Of the Free Sellers
TO the President, and on the other to rouse
the people Of the slave states against him
for merely wishing that government should
be provided for California and declining to
sustain Mr.. Walkers amendment This
policy is two-edged sword, and though the
Union uses it with good deal Of apparent
skill, it has inflicted some desperate wounds
upon the interests Of its own party, both in
the South and in the North. Before the
argument is done with, the country will
come to know the whole truth in rela-
ton to the Presidents course upon the
question in dispute. He stood then as
he stood before and as he stands now
on the impregnabe ground Of the Con-
He is President Of the United
States, the head Of the Executive power Of
the United States, but the duties Of his office
are prescribed by the Constitution. So far
as the legislative power Of Congress is CON
cerned, he has said he will not exert his
official or individual influence to interfere
with the free exercise Of that power. No
ingenuity can successfully construe the mere
expression Of a wish that law should be sub
stituted for anarchy in given territory,
into interference with the powers Of legisla-
ton enjoyed by Congress The President
did not, in the attempt Of the last Congress
to provide a government for California, in
terfere at ALL He is entirely guiltless Of Mr..
Giddings's charge against him, and the
Unions accusation, that he defeated Mr..
Walkers amendment by not taking sides in
favor Of its passage, is equally unfounded.
Both parties, il seems, blame the General
for the failure Of the California bill, and this
very fact IS proof enough that he is not
at all in the premises, for be
could not be instrumental in producing two
opposite results by the same means. The
Free Sellers assert, that he entered the arena
openly, and used his power to procure the
passage Of Walkers amendment, which pro-
vlded for the extension of slavery in Cali
fornia. And they further assert, that they
defeated it, and they argue that if the Cen
eral had sided with the Webster or Free
Soil amendment Calilornia wonll have HAD