the committee. The language of the report of
the committee on the subject of reporting was
this:
"The committee who were instructed to in-
quire as to the terms at which a competent re-
porter could be employed, beg leave to report,
that from the offers submitted, the services of a
competent reporter can be secured fur an amount
not exceeding the sum of four thousand dollars;
and the whole cost of reports, including printing,
will not exceed eight thousand dollars."
After that we had nothing to do with the sub-
ject. There being no complaint made to the
committee, we had nothing to do but reserve
twenty per cent. out of the fund, according to
the stipulations. But, (continued Mr. S..) he
had risen for the purpose of answering the question
of his friend from Caroline, [Mr. Stewart,]
and that was in reference to other offers to exe-
cute the reporting. His friend was entirely
right in his supposition, and that fact was dis-
tinctly submitted to the Convention in one of our
reports, as the ground upon which the commit-
tee said that the reporter would not be entitled
to more than four thousand dollars. We thought
to have the advantage of that competition.
More than two or three persons did offer to do
the reporting at a less rate,
Mr, STEWART, of Caroline. Why was not the
proposition accepted ?
Mr. STEWART, of Baltimore city, would make
one other remark. As to the question of law
which the gentleman from Kent, [Mr. Cham-
bers,] had raised, he seemed to think that we
were now in the performance of a new contract.
The very moment the resolution of the majority
of the committee on printing had been adopted
by the Convention, there was a motion made to
reconsider it the next day, and before any new
expenditure had been made under the contract,
so that the reporter was admonished by that
pending motion to reconsider, not to enter into
any new engagement, based upon the further ap-
propriations.
Mr. HOWARD moved the previous question.
Mr. SPENCER. Does the gentleman insist up-
on his motion ? I hope he will withdraw it.
Mr. HOWARD. I hope the gentleman will par-
don me. If a man cannot take a liberty with
his friends, I am at a loss to know with whom he
can. I hope the gentleman will excuse me, for
I am endeavoring, as far as I am individually
concerned, to progress with the business so as to
enable us to adjourn the first week in May.
The previous question was then seconded.
And the yeas and nays being demanded, or-
dered and taken,
Resulted as follows:
Affirmative.—Messrs. Kent, Ridgely, Dickin-
son, Chambers, of Cecil, McCullough, Miller,
Hearn, Fooks, Shriver, Biser, Annan, Nelson,
Thawley, Stewart, of Caroline, Hardcastle,
Stewart, of Baltimore city, Sherwood, of Balti-
more city. Ware, Schley, Fiery, John Newcom-
er, Harbine, Michael Newcomer, Brewer, We-
ber, Hollyday, Slicer, Parke, Shower, Cockey
and Brown—31.
54 |
Negative.—Messrs. Chapman, President, Mor-
gan, Blakistone, Hopewell, Ricaud, Lee, Cham-
bers, of Kent, Mitchell, Donaldson, Dorsey,
Wells, Bond, Brent, of Charles, Howard, Bu-
chanan, John Dennis, James U. Dennis, Cris-
field, Dashiell, Hicks, Goldsborough, Eccleston,
Bowie, Tuck, Sprigg, McCubbin, Bowling, Spen-
cer, Grason, George, McMaster, Gaither,
Gwinn, Brent, of Baltimore city, Davis, Wa-
ters, Anderson and Smith—37.
So the Convention refused to reconsider their
vote on said resolution.
Mr. MCHENRY, when his name was called on
the yeas and nays just taken, rose in his seat and
stated, that he should have voted in the affirmative,
but had paired off with Mr. Jenifer, who is
confined by indipoiition. but would have been
present had he not consented to have paired off
with him.
PUBLIC WORKS.
The Convention then resumed the considera-
tion of the order of the day, being the substitute
offered by Mr. THOMAS fur the report of the
committee creating a board of public works, and
which substitute has been accepted by the Con-
vention.
The question pending before the Convention on
yesterday, being on the amendment offered by
Mr. SCHLEY to the amendment offered by Mr.
HOWARD, to insert after the word " canal," the
words " on banking."
Mr. DAVIS, in continuation of his remarks
commenced yesterday, said:
The gentleman, (Mr. Howard,) yesterday said
that he, (Mr. D.,) was unfortunate in referring
to the course of the Governor of the State, in re-
gard to the public work. The gentleman would
allow him to put himself right. He, [Mr. D.,)
wished to show that the two previous Governors,
thought it their duty to look into the matter—he
mentioned it without intending to express an
opinion as to whether they were right or wrong-
in what they had done, to show the want of ne-
cessity to create another board to perform a duty
which belongs to the Executive, and to show
that we should have no other board to divide the
responsibility with the Executive, whose chief
duty it was to see that the laws were faithfully
executed. That was what, and all, he intended
to say on that point
The honorable gentleman. (Mr. Howard,) in
the course of his remarks, also referred to the
tolls upon the public works of this State
[Mr. D.,] did not think it necessary to open the
question of tolls. He would only say to the gentleman
however, there were other matters than
coal which entered into the consideration of this
subject. There was the article of iron and iron
ore, plaster, flour, and a great variety of other
articles. It was an extremely complicated mat-
ter to adjust, but all he meant now to say was,
that if the gentleman had any disposition to open
the subject) he, (Mr. D.,) would not decline any
comparison he thought proper to make. He
would be prepared to meet him on that point in
regard to tolls. He repeated that if this subject
was to be gone into, he should introduce the toll |
