clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
Proceedings and Debates of the 1850 Constitutional Convention
Volume 101, Page 607   View pdf image
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

607


Chambers, of Kent, Donaldson, Wells, Randall, Kent, Sellman,
Weems, Dalrymple, Brent, of Charles, Buchanan, John Dennis,
Dashiell, Hodson, Phelps, Bowie, Tuck, Sprigg, McCubbin,
Dirickson, McMaster, Hearn, Fooks, Johnson, Schley, John
Newcomer, Kilgour, Waters and Anderson—32.
So the previous question was sustained.
The question was then put,
"Will the Convention accept the substitute as offered by Mr.
Bowie, for the amendment proposed by Mr. Jenifer, and the sub
stitute offered therefor by Mr. Michael Newcomer?"
Theyeas and nays being ordered appeared as follows:
AFFIRMATIVE—Messrs. Chapman, Pres't, Morgan, Lee, Dal-
rymple, Buchanan, Bowie, Tuck, Sprigg, McC ubbin, Spencer,
Kilgour, Brewer, Anderson and Hollyday 14.
NEGATIVE—-Messrs. Ricaud, Chambers of Kent, Donaldson,
Wells, Randall, Kent, Sellman, Weems, Brent of Charles,
Howard, Bell, Welch, Chandler, Lloyd, Sherwood of Talbot,
John Dennis, Crisfield, Hodson, Eccleston, Phelps, Chambers,
of Cecil, McCullough, Miller, McLane, Grason, George, Wright,
Dirickson, McMaster, Fooks, Jacobs, Thomas, Johnson, Gaither,
Biser, Annan, Sappington, McHen ry, Magraw, Nelson, Thawley,
Gwinn, Sherwood, of Balt, city, Ware, Schley, Fiery, Neill,
John Newcomer, Harbine, Michael Newcomer, Davis, Waters,
Weber, Slicer, Fitzpatrick, Parke, Shower and Brown—58,
So the Convention refused to accept the substitute.
Mr. Chambers of Kent, gave notice that. at the proper time he
should move to reconsider the vote of the Convention on yesterday,
adopting the 2nd branch of the amendment offered by Mr. Cris
field, to the 9th section of the report.
The question was then put,
Will the Convention accept the substitute as offered by Mr
Michael Newcomer, and amended on the motions of Messrs.
Shriver and Johnson, for the amendment proposed by Mr. Jenifer,
as the 10th section of the report?
Mr. Biser, moved the question be taken by yeas and nays, and
being ordered appeared as follows:
AFFIRMATIVE—Messrs. Ricaud, Seilman, Buchanan, Bell,
Welch, Chandler, Ridgely, Sherwood of Talbot, Crisfield,
Dash iell, Eccieston, Phelps, M cC ullough, Grason, George, Wright,
Dirickson, Fooks, Jacobs, Thomas, Johnson, Gait her, Biser,
Annan, Sappington, Magraw, Thawley, Gwinn, Sherwood of
Balt. city, Ware, Schley, Fiery, Neill, John Newcomer, Harbine,
Nichael Newcomer, Davis, Kilgour, Brewer, Waters, Weber,
Slicer, Fitzpatrick, Parke, Shower and Brown—46.
NEGATIVE—Messrs Chapman, Pres't, Morgan, Lee, Chambers,
of Kent, Donaldson, Wells, Randall, Kent, Dalrymple, Brent,
of Charles, Howard, Lloyd, John Dennis, Hodson, Chambers,


 

clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Proceedings and Debates of the 1850 Constitutional Convention
Volume 101, Page 607   View pdf image
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  October 06, 2023
Maryland State Archives