Mr. BROWN said that to obviate one of the
many difficulties which the introduction of the
resolution was designed to prevent, he would
move the previous question.
Mr. JENIFER. I made a motion that the reso-
lution be laid on the table.
Mr. BROWN suggested that the gentleman had
withdrawn it,
Mr. JENIFER said he had done so only at the
request of the gentleman from Baltimore city,
(Mr. BRENT.)
Mr. BRENT thereupon renewed the motion to
lay on the table—at the same time, of course,
indicating his intention to vote against it. And,
he asked the yeas and nays, which were ordered.
And the question having been taken, the vote
resulted as follows:
Affirmative.—Messrs. Blakistone, Hopewell,
Ricaud, Lee, Chambers, of Kent, Donaldson,
Dorsey, Wells, Kent, Weems, Dalrymple, Bond,
Jenifer, Ridgely, John Dennis, James U. Den-
nis, Williams, Hodson, Goldsborough, McLane,
Sprigg, McCubbin, George, Wright, Annan and
Holliday—26.
Negative.—Messrs. Chapman, President, Mor-
gan, Dent, Mitchell, Bell, Welsh, Sherwood, of
Talbot, Colston, Crisfield, Dashiell, Hicks, Ec-
cleston, Phelps, Chambers of Cecil, McCullough,
Miller, Dirickson, McMaster, Hearn, Shriver,
Gaither, Biser, Sappington, McHenry, Magraw,
Nelson, Carter, Thawley, Stewart of Caroline,
Hardcastle, Gwinn, Brent of Balt. city, Ware,
Fiery, Neill, Jr., John Newcomer, Harbine,
Kilgour, Brewer, Waters, Weber, Slicer, Fitz-
patrick, Smith, Parke, Shower, Cockey and
Brown—48.
So the resolution was not laid on the table,
and the question recurring on the adoption of the
resolution.
Mr. RIDGELY, said he had desired to see the
proposition laid upon the table, not because
he objected to the principle of it, but because
he thought that it covered too much ground.—
An order had been adopted changing the daily
hour of meeting to ten o'clock. The resolution
now under consideration provided that the name
of every member not present at the call of the
roll, should be entered on the Journal unless he
should report himself before adjournment. Now
it was obvious, from the proceedings which had
taken place this morning, that if the roll was to
he called at ten o'clock, and this resolution was
to be adopted, it would be found that no quorum
was present, and that a portion of every day
would be occupied in notifying the Secretary
what members were present. He (Mr. R.)
would suggest that the Convention should, in
the first place, go back to a proper hour of
meeting—eleven o'clock. Let that be done,
and he would then go for the proposition before
them, and live up to it. If members were not
then present, let their names be recorded thus
and so.
He thought that no great object could be effec-
ted by meeting before eleven. A number of
members were upon committees which met be-
tween the hours of 9 and 11. It would be very |
inconvenient to gentlemen who were in the Con-
vention five or six hours during the day, and up-
on committees in the morning and at night, to
meet here at ten, and if this resolution was to be
adopted, he hoped it would be with the qualifica-
tion he suggested as to the hour of meeting. And
he proposed an amendment to that effect (to pre-
cede the resolution.)
Mr, HARBINE said, he hoped that the amend-
ment would not prevail. In his opinion, the
hour of ten was not too early an hour for the
commencement of the business of the Convention,
He doubted whether there wag any Convention
now in session, which met later than ten. It was
late enough, if gentlemen looked to the time
that the Convention had been in session, or to the
present state of its business. He disclaimed the
vocation of a lecturer. It was probably as much
his fault as the fault of any other member of the
Convention, that things were in the condition in
which they now stand. He could not claim for
himself to have been altogether free from the
charge of inattention to duty. He could not and
would not shut his eye to the fact that very little
progress had been made in the public business
and he coincided entirely in the remarks which
had been made on that point by the gentleman
from Baltimore city (Mr. BRENT). It was that
the Convention should meet at an early hour, and
should go seriously to work, that its business
might be disposed of.
He denied the validity of the argument which
had been urged as respected the business of the
committees, or the difficulty of procuring the at-
tendance of gentlemen at the hour designated.
He believed that when the hour was once known
and understood, gentlemen would be punctual in
the discharge of their duties; and if they would
not, the fault and the responsibility would rest
upon them.
Mr. HICKS sent up to the Secretary's table an
amendment (by way of substitute) which he de-
sired to offer.
The PRESIDENT thought that the amendment
was not now in order,
Mr, WEBER demanded the previous question,
and by ayes 34, noes 29, there was asecond.
MR. DORSEY rose to move an amendment.
The PRESIDENT intimated that no amendment
was now in order, the previous question having
been recorded. The main question was then or-
dered to be taken, which main question was,
first, on the amendment of Mr. RIDGELY (fixing
eleven as the hour of meeting.)
Mr. JOHN NEWCOMER called the yeas and
nays, which were ordered and were as follows :
Affirmative—Messrs. Chapman, President, Mor-
gan, Blakistone, Hopewell, Ricaud, Chambers of
Kent, Mitchell, Donaldson, Dorsey, Wells, Sell-
man, Weems, Dalrymple, Bond, Jenifer, Ridge-
ly, John Dennis, Crisfield, Williams, Hicks,
Hodson, Goldsborough, Phelps, Miller, McLane,
Sprigg, McCubbin, Wright, Stewart of Caroline,
Hardcastle, Brent of Baltimore city, Kilgour,
Waters and Hollyday.—34.
Negative.— Messrs. Dent, Lee, Kent, Bell,
Welch, Sherwood, of Talbot, Colston, James U. |
