liams, Hodson, Goldsborough, Phelps, McCullough,
Miller, Tuck, Sprigg, McCubbin, Bow-
ling, Wright, Dirickson, Hearn, Jacobs, Thomas,
Shriver, Biser, Annan, Stephenson, McHenry,
Magraw, Nelson, Carter, Thawley, Stewart, of
Caroline, Gwinn, Brent, of Baltimore city,
Ware, Schley, Fiery, Neill, Harbine, Kilgour,
Brewer, Waters, Anderson, Weber, Hollyday,
Fitzpatrick, Smith, Parke, Ege, Shower, Cockey
and Brown—62.
Negative— Messrs. Dorsey, Wells, Sellman
and Davis—4.
So the first branch of the amendment was
agreed to.
The question was then taken on the second
branch of the amendment, which was in the fol-
lowing words;
" And one or more commissioners learned in
the law, whose duty it shall be to revise, simpli-
fy and abridge the rules and practice, pleadings,
forms and proceedings of the courts of record in
this State."
The result was as follows:
Affirmative.--Messrs. Chapman, Prevent, Mor-
gan, Blakistone, Dent, Ricaud, Lee, Weems, Bu-
chanan, Bell, Welch, Lloyd, Dickinson, Sher-
wood, of Talbot, John Dennis, James U. Den-
nis, Williams, Hodson, Phelps, McCullough,
Miller, McCubbin, Bowling, George Wright
Dirickson, Hearn, Jacobs, Thomas, Shriver, Bi-
ser, Annan, Stephenson. McHenry, Magraw,
Nelson, Carter, Thawley, Stewart, of Caroline,
Gwinn, Brent, of Baltimore city, Ware, Schley,
Fiery, Harbine, Kilgour, Brewer, Waters,
Anderson, Weber, Hollyday, Fitzpatrick, Smith,
Parke. Ege, Shower, Cockey and Brown—58.
Negative.— Messrs. Chambers, of Kent, Dor-
sey, Wells, Sellman, Goldsborough, Tuck, Sprigg
and Davis—8.
So the second branch of the amendment was
agreed to.
The question was then taken on the third
branch of the amendment which was in the fol-
lowing words:
" And report the same to the Legislature for
adoption."
The result was as follows;
Affirmative-- Messrs. Chapman, President, Mor-
gan, Blakistone, Dent, Ricaud, Lee, Chambers
of Kent, Sellman, Weems, Bond, Buchanan
Bell, Welch, Lloyd, Dickinson. Sherwood, of
Talbot, John Dennis, James U. Dennis, Williams,
Hodson, Goldsborough, Phelps, McCullough.
Miller, Tuck, Sprigg, McCubbin, Bow-
ling, George, Wright, Dirickson, Hearn, Jacobs,
Thomas, Shriver, Biser, Annan, Stephenson, Me
Henry, Magraw, Nelson, Carter, Thawley, Stew-
art, of Caroline, Gwinn, Brent, of Baltimore city
Ware, Schley, Fiery, Neill, Harbine, Davis
Brewer, Waters, Anderson, Weber, Hollyday
Fitzpatrick, Smith, Parke, Ege, Shower, Cockey
and Brown— 63.
Negative.— Messrs. Dorsey and Wells—2.

So the third branch of the amendment was
agreed to.
The question was then taker, on the fourth and
last branch of the amendment, as follows :
"And it shall be the duty of the Legislature at
the expiration of every subsequent period of ten
years after the adoption and promulgation of the
code of laws, to have published and promulga-
ted all the Statute Laws of this State then in
force. "
And the result was as follows:
Affirmative—Messsrs. Chapman, President,
Morgan, Blakistone, Dent, Ricaud, Lee, Cham-
bers, of Kent, Weems, Buchanan, Bell, Welch,
Lloyd, Dickinson, Sherwood, of Talbot, John
Dennis, James U. Dennis, Williams, Hodson
McCullough, Miller, Tuck, Sprigg, McCubbin
Bowling, George, Wright, Dirickson, Hearn
Thomas, Shriver, Biser, Annan, Stephenson
McHenry, Magraw, Nelson, Carter, Thawley
Stewart, of Caroline, Brent, of Baltimore city
Ware, Schley, Fiery, Neill, Harbine, Davis
Kilgour, Brewer, Waters, Anderson, Weber
Hollyday, Fitzpatrick, Smith, Parke, Ege, Shower,
Cockey and Brown—62.
Negative,—Messrs. Dorsey, Wells, Sellman,
Goldsborough, Phelps and Gwinn—6.
So the fourth and last branch of the amendment
was agreed to.
The question then recurred on the amendment
proposed by Mr. SPENCER, as a substitute for the
said section, as amended.
Some conversation followed on a point of
order.
Mr. DORSEY directed the attention of the Con-
vention to that part of the amendment of Mr.
SCHLEY, which proposed that the Legislature
should appoint, one or more, commissioners to
codify, &c.
Mr. DORSEY thought that a provision, so in-
definite, ought not to be incorporated into the
Constitution. The number of commissioners
might be so multiplied, that there would be no re-
sponsibility any where, as to the manner in which
the work should be done. The result probably
might be, that the character of the work might
be such as to render it of no value. The ex-
pense, under such a system, would probably be
double under the plan proposed by himself.
Mr. D. was also opposed to the other part of
the amendment of the gentleman, which provided
for the appointment of commissioners, in rela-
tion to pleadings, &c. He thought that the
Convention ought to pause before giving such
powers to any commissioners. Under the power
thus given, the commissioners might abolish special
pleading altogether. The gentleman had
stated that he had no such intention.
Mr. D. had no doubt as to the gentleman's intention.
But the language of the amendment
was unlimited, and gave the power to the commissioners
to do as they pleased. Great expense
would also be incurred, without the attainment of
any commensurate object.
Mr. D, then briefly explained the character of