The question then recurred on the modified
amendment of Mr. CONSTABLE.
Mr. CONSTABLE again modified the amendment
by striking out the words "without paying a
tax."
The words were, Mr. C. said, unnecessary.
The question then was on inserting the amend-
ment of Mr. CONSTABLE, in lieu of the first para-
graph of the amendment offered yesterday by Mr.
GEORGE.
Mr. WEEMS asked the yeas and nays which
were ordered, and being taken, resulted as fol-
lows:
Affirmative—Messrs. Blakistone, Dent, Hope-
well, Sellman, Weems, Bond, Merrick, Buchanan,
Welch, Chandler, Lloyd, Colston, James U. Den-
nis, Dashiell, Hicks, Constable, Chambers, of
Cecil. Miller, McLane, McMasler, Hearn, Fooks,
Gaither, Stephenson, McHenry, Hardcaslle, John
Newcomer, Michael Newcomer, Parke, Shower
and Brown—31.
Negative—Messrs. Chapman, President, Ricaud,
Lee, Chambers, of Kent, .Mitchell, Donaldson,
Dorsey, Wells, Randall, Jenifer, Bell, Ridgely,
Crisfield, Goldsborough, Bowie, Sprigg, Bow-
ling, Spencer, Grason, George, Thomas, Shriver,
Biser. Sappington, Thawley, Stewart, of Caro-
line, Gwinn, Stewart, of Baltimore city, Sher-
wood, of Baltimore city, Presstman, Ware,
Schley, Fiery, Neill, Harbine, Davis, Kilgour,
Weber, Hollyday, Slicer, Smith, Ege and
Cockey—43.
So the amendment was rejected.
The question then recurred on the amendment
of Mr. GEORGE.
Mr. DONALDSON, moved to amend said amend-
ment by striking out all after the word "improve-
ment," to the end thereof, and insert the follow-
ing:
"But without laying a tax, debts may be con-
tracted to any amount that maybe necessary to
provide for the punctual payment of the interest
of the public debt now existing, or in case of
war, or to suppress insurrection."
Mr. CHAMBERS, of Kent, suggested certain di-
visions of the question on the amendment of Mr.
GEORGE.
Mr. C. referred to the provision prohibiting
appropriations of money for the use of individuals.
Me concurred in the spirit of the proposition
which was, that the legislature should not mix.
itself up with private enterprise. But as the
provision now stood, it would continually embar-
rass the legislature.
He suggested several cases in which difficul-
ties might grow out of it, and said, that if these
difficulties could be removed, he would vote for
the amendment. He preferred it to the proposi-
tion of the gentleman from Cecil, [Mr. Consta-
ble.]
Some explanations as to the just interpretation
of this branch of the proposition took place, be-
tween Messrs. GRASON, CHAMBERS, of Kent,
SPENCER and THOMAS.
Mr. CHAMBERS of Kent, moved to anend the |
amendment, by striking out the word "indivi-
duals"
Mr. THOMAS asked the yeas and nays,
Which were ordered, and
Being taken, resulted as follows:
Affirmative—Messrs. Chapman. Pres't, Blakis-
tone, Dent, Ricaud, Lee, Chambers of Kent,
Donaldson, Dorsey, Wells, Randall, Sellman,
Weems, Jenifer, Ridgely, Crisfield. Hicks, Goldsborough,
Constable, Bowie, Sprigg, Bowling,
Spencer, McMaster, Fooks, McHenry, Schley,
Fiery, Neill, Harbine, Davis and Kilgour—31.
Negative—Messrs. Merrick, Buchanan, Bell,
Welch, Chandler, Lloyd, Colston, James U.
Dennis, Dashiell, Chambers of Cecil, Miller,
McLane, Grason, George, Thomas, Gaither,
Biser, Annan, Sappington, Stephenson, Thaw-
ley, Stewart of Caroline, Hardcastle, Gwinn,
Stewart of Baltimore city, Presstman, Ware,
John Newcomer, Michael Newcomer, Weber,
Hollyday, Slicer, Smith, Parke, Ege, Cockey
and Brown—37.
So the amendment was rejected.
The question then recurred on the amendment
of Mr. DONALDSON.
Mr. THOMAS asked the yeas and nays,
Which were ordered.
Some explanations followed as to the construc-
tion of the amendment, by Messrs. SPENCER,
THOMAS, MCLANE and DONALDSON.
The question was then taken on the amend-
ment of Mr. DONALDSON, and the result was as
follows:
Affirmative—Messrs. Chapman, Pres't, Dent,
Ricaud, Lee, Chambers of Kent, Donaldson,
Dorsey, Wells, Randall, Sellman, Merrick, Jeni-
fer, Crisfield, Hicks, Goldsborough, Bowie,
Sprigg, Bowling, Spencer, Grason, George,
McMaster, McHenry, Schley, Fiery, Neill, John
Newcomer, Davis, Kilgour, Weber, Slicer and
Smith—33.
Negative—Messrs. Hopewell, Weems, Buch-
anan. Bell, Welch, Chandler, Ridgely, Lloyd,
Colston, James U. Dennis, Dashiell, Constable,
Chambers of Cecil, Miller, McLane, Fooks,
Thomas, Gaither, Biser, Annan, Sappington,
Stephenson, Thawley, Stewart of Caroline, Hard-
castle, Gwinn, Stewart of Baltimore city. Brent
of Baltimore city, Presstman, Ware, Harbine,
Michael Newcomer, Hollyday, Parke, Ege,
Cockey and Brown—37.
So the amendment was rejected.
Mr. DAVIS then moved to amend said amend-
ment by inserting after the word "corporations"
in the twelfth line, these words, "except for pur-
poses of education."
Mr. DAVIS called the attention of the Conven-
tion to the fact that by this proposition, the Le-
gislature were deprived of any power to make
appropriations for the purpose of education. In
his part of the State, the people generally were
desirous to have a system of education establish-
ed. And now we are here, blocked up by this
provision, which prevents any appropriation for
any kind of improvement, even for the education
of the children in the State. |
