By: Arin Alexander

 MEXICAN AMERICAN WAR

THE UNITED STATES CLAIMED OVER 500,000 SQUARE MILES OF NEW TERRITORY. THIS INCLUDED TEXAS AND MEXICAN TERRIOTRIES OF NEW MEXICO AND UPPER CALIFORNIA. WITH ALL THIS NEW TERRITORY, SECTIONAL CONTROVERSY WAS SPARKED IN AMERICAN POLITICS. THE POLITICAL FOCUS WAS NOW SHIFTED TO HOW MUCH OF THE LAND ACQUIRED FROM MEXICO AND THE DETERMINATION OF FUTURE SLAVE STATES. IN AUGUST OF 1846 PRESIDENT JAMES K. POLK ASKED FOR $2 MILLION TO NEGOTIATE PEACE AND SETTLE THE BOUNDARY WITH MEXICO. POLK ALSO SOUGHT THE ACQUISTITION OF TEXAS AND OHER MEXICAN TERRITORIES..

DAVID WILMOT, A DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSMAN FROM PENNSYLVANIA, OFFERED HIS PROPOSAL, WHICH BECAME KNOWN AS THE WILMOT PROVISO. HE ATTATCHED THIS PROPOSAL TO POLK’S REQUEST FOR THE $2 MILLION NEEDED TO FIX THINGS WITH MEXICO. WILMOT HAD A STRONG RECORD OF SUPPORTING THE POLK ADMINISTRATION. WILMOT WAS APPOINTED TO PRESENT THE AMENDMENT THAT WOULD LATER TAKE ON HIS NAME. IT WAS ASSUMED THAT TEXAS WOULD BE THE LAST SLAVE STATE TO ENTER THE UNION. THIS MEANT THAT CALIFORNIA AND NEW MEXICO WOULD HAVE FREE LABOR AND THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY SUPPORTED THIS.IN THIS PROVISO, WILMOT SOUGHT TO PROHIBIT SLAVERY IN ANY OF THE TERRITORY THAT WAS GAINED IN THE MEXICAN AMERICAN WAR. IT ALSO INCLUDED THE CONTROVERSIAL SLAVERY ISSUE INTO POLK’S FUNDING DEBATE.

NORTHERN DEMOCRATS SUPPORTED THE PROVISO BECAUSE IT ALLOWED THEM TO SUSTAIN THE POPULAR INCREASE FOR THE NEED OF THE EXPANSION OF SLAVERY. SOUTHERNERS ON THE OTHER HAND REACTED ANGRILY. THEY DECLARED THAT IT REPRESENTED A NORTHERN SCHEME AGAINST THE SOUTH’S INTERESTS. WHEN TAKEN TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENATIVES, THE APPROPRIATIONS BIRL WAS APPROVED. THE PROVISO HOWEVER, WAS ADJOURNED AT THE SENATE BEFORE IT COULD DEBATE THE BILL. THE SENATE APPROVED THE BILL BUT REJECTED THE PROVISO.

AS A RESULT, THE PROVISO NEVER WENT INTO EFFECT. WHEN THE NEXT CONGRESS CONVENED, THERE WAS A NEW APPROPRIATIONS BILL FOR $3 MILLION. THIS NEW 3 MILLION DOLLALR BILL WAS THE SOLE ITEM OF BUSINESS IN THE HOUSE. PRESTON KING OF NEW YORK REINTRODUCED THE WILMOT PROVISO BUT THIS TIME THE EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY WAS EXTENDED BEYOND THE MEXICAN TERRITORY AND ALSO INCLUDE ANY TERRITORY THAT AMERICA WOULD GAIN IN THE FUTURE. STEPHEN DOUGLAS, A DEMOCRAT OF ILLIONIS, REINTRODUCED THE PROPSAL TO EXTEND THE MISSOURI COMPROMISE LINE TO THE WEST COAST AND IT WAS TURNED DOWN. WHEN THE HOUSE PASSED THE BILL THE SENTAE WAS FORCED TO CONSIDER THE PROPOSAL. UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF JOHN CALHOUN AND OTHER PROSLAVERY SENATORS, THE SENATE REFUSED TO ACCEPT THE WILMOT AMENDMENT AND APPROVED THE FUNDS FOR THE NEGOTIATIONS BY ITSELF.

THE PROVISO PASSED THE HOUSE BECAUSE A MAJORITY OF THE REPRESENTATIVES CAME FROM THE NORTH. UNDER THE CONSTITUTION, EACH SATE RECEIVED REPRESENTATIVES BASED ON ITS POPULATION. THE NORTH HAD MORE THAN THE SOUTH. IN THE SENATE, THERE WERE THE SAME NUMBER OF SLAVE AND FREE STATES. EACH STATE WAS ENTITLED TO TWO SENATORS. WHEN SENATORS FROM THE NORTH AND SOUTH VOTED ALONG REGIONAL LINES, A BILL COULDN’T BE APPROVED. NORTHERN AND SOUTHERN STATES INTENTIONALLY TRIED TO MAINTAIN THE BALANCE BETWEEN SLAVE AND FREE STATES. AS LONG AS NEITHER SIDE HAD AN ADVANTAGE IN THE SENATE, A BILL COULD NOT BE SENT TO THE PRESIDENT THAT WOULD FAVOR ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER

FOR MANY YEARS, THE WILMOT PROVISO WAS OFFERED AS AN AMENDMENT TO MANY BILLS. BUT IT WAS NEVER APPROVED BY THE SENATE. NOW BECAUSE OF THE REPETITION OF THE INTRODUCTION OF THE PROVISO THE ISSUE OF SLAVERY WAS KEPT BEFORE THE CONGRESS AND THE NATION. THE COMPROMISE OF 1850 CREATED DISCORD WITHIN THE DEMOCRATIC AND WHIG PARTIES. THE CREATION OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IN 1854 WAS BASED ON AN ANTISLAVERY PLATFORM THAT AUTHORIZED THE WILMOT PROVISO. THE PROHIBITION OF SLAVERY IN ANY NEW TERRITORY BECAME A PARTY PRINICIPLE. THE PROVISO, EVEN WITH ITS FAILURE TO ACT AS A CONGRESSIONAL AMENDMENT, PROVED TO BE A BATTLE CRY FOR OPPONENTS OF SLAVERY.

THE PROVISO PUSHED THE COUNTRY CLOSER TO CIVIL WAR AND RAISED QUESTIONS ABOUT SLAVES WHICH HAD NOT BEEN ASKED PRIOR TO IT. SOUTHERNERS VIWED SLAVES AS PROPERTY, MEANING THAT UNDER THE CONSTITUTION THE OWNER HAD THE RIGHT TO OWN SLAVES. THIS CERTAINLY LED TO A LOT OF DISAGREEMENT AND DISCORD TO ANY ACTIONS THAT WOULD ULTIMATLEY RULE OUT SLAVERY WHILE THE COUNTRY WAS STILL GROWING. THIS WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THAT THE PROVISO WAS NOT PASSED. THE AMENDMENT WAS NEVER ACTUALLY ADOPTED BY CONGRESS AND WAS EXPRESSLY REJECTED IN THE COMPROMISE OF 1850 AND ITS CONTENT WAS DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL BY THE SUPREME COURT IN THE DRED SCOTT CASE IN THE WILMOT PROVISO WAS EVENTUALLY ADOPTED BY THE FREE-SOIL PARTY AND LATER THE REPUBLICAN PARTY FAVORED EXCLUDING SLAVERY FROM NEW TERRITORIES.

en&tbs=tl:1&tbo=u&ei=1IgMS6KlBcLknAf5zJ3LAw&sa=X&oi= timeline_result&ct=title&resnum=11&ved=0CDEQ5wIwCg en&tbs=tl:1&tbo=u&ei=1IgMS6KlBcLknAf5zJ3LAw&sa=X&oi= timeline_result&ct=title&resnum=11&ved=0CDEQ5wIwCg ot-Proviso.html ot-Proviso.html viso.htm viso.htm wilmot_proviso.jsp wilmot_proviso.jsp html html ml