|
vention, be so amended as to apply the previous
question without restriction and without debate
to thm matter then pending, and to such amend-
ments thereto as may be offered consistently with
existing rules, after the call for the previous
question has. been sustained, and in voting on the
matter pending when the previous question is
sustained and the amendments thereto as afore-
said, the previous question shall then be exhaus-
ted.
"And be it further ordered, That all rules,
which allow this Convention to resolve itself into
committee of the whole be rescinded."
Mr. BRENT briefly explained the principle
which it wag his intention to embrace in the order.
He expressed the belief that there was a disposi-
tion on the part of the Convention not to go into
committee of the whole, and in order that some
protection at least might be given to the minority,
hit., proposition contemplated that the pending
matter, when amendable under existing rules,
might be amended. In other words, he was for
leaving it to the sense of the majority to say,
when the debate should be closed. He illustra-
ted the operation of the amendment. His desire
wai that the amendment heretofore adopted on
motion of the gentleman from Anne Arundel,
(Mr. RANDALL,) should be rescinded so far as it
gave the mover the power to designate the mat-
ter to which the previous question should apply.
He insisted on the expediency of its adoption,
and the happy effects it would have on the busi-
ness of the Convention. Nine-tenths of the dis-
cussions here had been but a repetition of the
same ideas in a different form. If any gentle-
man had a better rule to suggest, he would cheer-
fully take it.
Mr. RICHD moved that the order be laid upon
the table.
Mr. BRENT asked the yeas and nays, which
were ordered, and being taken, were as follows :
Affirmative. — Messrs. Chapman, President, Mor-
gan, Blakistone, Dent, Ricaud, Chambers of
Kent, Mitchell, Donaldson, Dorsey, Wells, Ran-
dall, Kent, Bond, Brent, of Charles, John Den-
nis, James U. Dennis, Crisfield, Dashiell, Wil-
liams, Hicks, Hodson, Ecclenton, Phelps, Bowie,
Sprigg, Bowling, Wright, McMaster, Fooks, Ja-
cobs, Schley, Fiery, John Newcomer, Harbine,
Davis, Weber and Smith— 37.
Negative — Messrs. Merrick, Buchanan, Bell,
Welch, Chandler, Ridgely, Lloyd, Dickinson,
Sherwood, of Talbot, Celston, Chambers, of
Cecil, McCullough, Miller, McUne, Tuck,
Thomas, Shriver, Gaither, Biser, Annan, Ste-
phenson, Magraw, Nelson, Carter, Thawley, Hard-
castle, Gwinn, Stewart, of Baltimore city, Brent,
of Baltimore city, Presstman, Ware, Brewer,
Hollyday, Slicer, Fitzpatrick, Parke, Cockey and
Brown- 38.
So the order was not laid on the table.
And the question recurring on its adoption,
Menrs. HARBINE and FIERY called for a di-
vision on the first and second branches, which
Mr. MERRICK now rose and stated that he had
acted under a misapprehension of the question,
and asked leave to change his vote.
14
|
The PRESIDENT said it could be done only by
unanimous consent.
Mr. TUCK said he had voted against laying the
order on the table because he thought that these
questions when once introduced should be settled,
that the Convention might know what its rules
were.
Mr. MERRICK said his intention was to vote for
the readiest way of getting rid of the proposition.
Some conversation followed between Messrs.
TUCK and BRENT as to the effect the order would
have on the amendment adopted on motion of
Mr. RANDALL.
Mr. TUCK then addressed a few remarks to
that branch of the order which proposed to re-
scind all rules allowing the Convention to resolve
itself into committee. Generally speaking, he
said, he was as much opposed to going into com-
mittee as any member could be, but he was not
in favor of abolishing the power. The debate
was at all times within the control of the majori-
ty, and there might be cases in which it might
be proper that the House should resolve itself
into committee. He would, therefore, retain
the power.
Mr. THOMAS made some remarks, in which he
expressed himself in iavor of the first branch of
the order; but suggested to Mr. BRENT that it
might perhaps be improved by adding the words
" they shall be submitted and passed upon with-
out debate."
As to the second branch of the proposition, he
dissented entirely from the gentleman from
Baltimore city, (Mr. BRENT.) There were advan-
ta es in committee of the whole, (of which, he,
Mr. T., should perhaps avail himself as little as
any member of the body,) which could not be se-
cured in Convention. He illustrated this opini-
on, and said that he could not, under any circum-
stance?, vote for this branch of the resolution.
Mr. RANDALL suggested that the gentleman
from Baltimore city, (Mr. BRENT,) would attain
his end by striking out from the amended 17th
rule, the words " or amendment" But Mr. K.
argued that it would be better to let that rule re-
main as it was, until the Convention hadjhad an
an opportunity of knowing something about its
practical operation.
He insisted on the importance of retaining the
power to go into committee, and contended hat
to adopt the restriction proposed, would prevent
calm deliberation, and lead to precipitate action.
He should vote against both propositions.
The PRESIDENT announced the hour of twelve,
that being the time appointed for the considera-
tion of the order of the day.
Mr. BISER moved to postpone it, with a view
to dispose of the subject matter before the Con-
vention.
Mr. SPENCEE enquired of the PRESIDINT, what
the order of the day was ?
The PRESIDENT said, it was the resolution re-
ported from the Committee on Representation.
The question was then taken on the motion of
Mr. BISER. and the order of the day was postponed.
Mr. BRENT contended that the amendment sug-
gested by the gentleman from Anne Arund«l,
(Mr. RANDALL,) would not accomplish the ob-
|
