Democratic banner., 1849-06-25
SenatOr Benton and the Proyiso.

90 -
ton in giving his reasons for his refusal to
obey the instructions of the Missouri Leg
~islature, Ptonounces with all the confidence
of SIR ORAcLE-ALL-wIsE, that the Will
mot Proviso is constitutional, that he never
attempts to show it, by any argument drawn
from the CONSTITUTION ITSELF. Why, we
ask, if the Wilmot proviso is so clearly con-
stitutional, does not Col. Benton, in the ef-
fulgence of his wisdom, condescend to en-
aightea the benighted minds of the Legis-
~laturs, that had the impudence to instruct
him? We have always held, and we be-
1ieve that it is a cardinal principle of the
democratic party, that all powers possess
ed by the General Government are plainly
oppressed by the letter Of the constitution,
or are clearly deduciM as necesssry to car
y out some expressly granted power; and
that tall powers not delegated to the United
States, BY the constitution, nor prohibited
byit to the States, are reserved to the States
respectively, or to the people," Now if
this rule of construction is correct, and we
presume no democrat will dispute it., } then
the power to pass the Wilmot proviso or to
iegislate upon the subject by the General
Government is easily pointed out Let us
examine the constitution a little in refer
,ence to this point. Is the power to enact
the Wilmot proviso contained in any of the
expressly granted powers of that instru-
ment? The only clause in it, that has any
reference to the territories is !his:-"The
Congress shall have power to dispose Of
and make all needfuI rules and regulations
respecting the territory and other property
belonging to the UnIed STATES" Now we
presume, that the most ULTRA B~ARNBuANER
of New York will not contend, that this
clause contains any power to legislate for
the people of the territory. 1t is simply a
power to dispose Of the territory, or public
domain, and other property belonging to the
United States-the word "~teIritory," being
~synonimous With public domain as used in
this c~onnexion. It recognises a property Of
the United States in the "territory" or
lands, and authorises the General Govern
ment to SNAKE all needful rules and regu-
l~ations'' to dispose of the same;-that is, to
lay off the s'torritories" into townships, sec
lions, half sections, quarter sections, &c.,
to erect Land Offices, appoint Receivers Of
the Public moneys, Registers of. the Land
Offices, &c,-in a word, s.to dispose of and
make all needful rules and regulations re-
sPecting the territory and other property
belonging to the United States;'' but no
one will be silly enough to contend that this
gives to Congress power to make NUM-
cspdl laws to govern the people living in the
territories. Then, as it is not in any of the
expressly delegated powers, is it in any of
the powers prohibited BY the constitution to
the States? In all the prohibitions Of
power by the constitution to the States,
there is not one word respecting the terri
tory,-besides If there had been such a pro-
hibition, it would have been absurd. Then
It the power exists at all, thrust be deduc-
ed as necessaryto carry out some erp, essly
granted power. Now If It does exist as an
incidental powes, to some n of the ex-
press grants, it is a much easier matter to
point it out, than it is to travel through all
the expressly granted powers to show that
It is not incidental to either of them. But
the best evidence Of its non-existence in
any Of them Is to be found in the fact, that
no two Of the distinguished Free Sellers
have agreed in deducing it from the same
expressed power; and Col. Benton more
cautious, but not less jealous than his CO.
AUDITORS in this nefarious conspiracy against
the constitution, declines entirely, to point
out where it exists, and contents himself
with the dogmatical assertion, that it is con-
stitusional;-well knowing that if he at
tsmPts nore, he will make himself ridicu.
lsus, BY locating apower, where it has not
the shadow Of an existence. Some of the
Barnburners with more zeal tha, d.,..H..