ferred to Howard District, and near to the Bal-
timore and Ohio Railroad. He had risen to
have it put on the record, that injustice had been
done him on that point. He should trouble the
Convention no further, except to ask his friend
from Baltimore county, [Mr. Howard,] to ac-
cept the amendment which he had drawn up.
He did it, because there were other interests
than mercantile concerned in the proposition,
which he, (Mr. D.) saw was about to pass by
the influence which had been brought to bear in
its favor. There was another interest that
should not be lost sight of, and that was em-
braced in the paper before him. The amendment
was as follows:
"And in adjusting the tolls, due regard shall
be had, so to adjust them, as to promote the Ag-
riculture of the State."
Mr. HOWARD declined to accept this amend-
ment.
Mr. DAVIS then remarked that this was an
interest which had been long neglected by the
legislation of the State. It had patiently borne
heavy burdens to promote other interests; he
thought it high time that something should be
done to promote this important interest. If this
board could regulate the tolls on our works of
internal improvement, as it was contended they
could, then it would have it in its power to do
great good to the State, by so adjusting them as
to promote the interest of Agriculture. He
wished to enjoin it upon the Board as a duty.
Mr. DAVIS moved further to amend the amend-
ment offered by Mr. HOWARD, by adding at the
end thereof the following:
"And in the adjustment of tolls, due regard
shall he had so to adjust them as to promote the
agriculture of the State."
Which was read.
Mr. SPENCER said that he had signified to the
Convention yesterday, that it would have been
agreeable to him to make a speech on this sub-
ject, and did not hesitate to say he would like to
have done so, but when he reflected that this was
the sixteenth day of the month, and when, too,
he considered that the great arm of the State had
never yet been touched—the new judiciary, etc.,
and when, also, he reflected that the treasury bill
had not been reached, and that they had yet to
examine all the bills that had been before this
body, since it had convened here, he would fore-
go saying what it had been his intention to say.
He would, therefore, now move the previous
question.
Mr. DIRICKSON desired to be informed by the
Chair, whether the previous question, if sustain-
ed, would cut off all amendments.
Mr. SPENCER. From this time it will.
Mr. DIRICKSON. My colleague, (Mr. Jacobs,)
has an amendment which he desires to offer. I
hope that the gentleman from Queen Anne, (Mr
Spencer,) will waive his demand for the previous
question, to enable my colleague to present it.
Mr. SPENCER said, if the amendment was in
order, he should have no objection, to waive the
demand for the previous question, if the gentle-
man, (Mr. Jacobs,) would renew it. |
The CHAIR, (occupied by Mr. Brown,) said,
he thought the amendment would he in order.
Mr, SPENCER waived the demand for the pre-
vious question, for the purpose indicated.
Mr. SCHLEY said, he hoped the gentleman,
[Mr, Spencer,] would not confine his waiver of
the previous question, to the single amendment
referred to. He, [Mr. S.,] was himself desirous
to otter an amendment.
Mr. SPENCER said, he did so, because any
further proposition to amend, would not be in
order.
Mr. JACOBS not offering his amendment,
Mr. SPENCER adhered to his demand for the
previous question.
Mr. SCHLEY enquired whether, if the previous
question should be sustained, it would afterwards
be competent for him to offer a substitute for all
the propositions.
The CHAIR, (occupied by Mr. Brown,) expres-
sed his opinion that the only mode by which the
gentleman, (Mr. Schley,) could accomplish his
object, would be by a reconsideration of the vote
on the other propositions.
In reply to an enquiry by Mr. DIRICKSON,
Mr. SPENCER suggested that the gentleman
from Worcester, (Mr. Jacobs,) might offer his
amendment as an additional section.
Some conversation followed.
The question was then taken on the second to
the previous question.
And there was a second.
Mr, DAVIS rose to move a call of the Conven-
tion, several gentlemen who desired to vote were
not, he said, at present in their seats.
Mr. BROWN submitted that the motion came
too late.
The PRESIDENT said, that the motion was not
in order, the previous question having been sus-
tained.
The question was put on the adoption of the
amendment as offered by Mr. DAVIS.
Mr. DAVIS moved the question be taken by
yeas and nays,
Which were ordered,
And being taken,
Were as follows:
Affirmative—Messrs. Chapman, Pres't, Morgan,
Blakistone, Hopewell, Ricaud, Chambers of
Kent, Mitchell, Dorsey, Kent, Bond, Brent of
Charles, Buchanan, Bell, Welch, Ridgely, Lloyd,
John Dennis, Hicks, Goldsborough, Eccleston,
Miller, Bowie, Tuck Sprigg, McCubbin, Bow-
ling, Spencer, Dirickson, McMaster, Jacobs,
Shriver, Biser, Stewart of Caroline, Schley,
Fiery, Davis, Brewer, Waters, Anderson, We-
ber, Smith and Cockey—43.
Negative—Messrs. Lee, Donaldson, Howard,
Crisfield, Dashiell, Williams, McCullough, Gra-
son, George, Fooks, Thomas, Gaither, Annan,
McHenry, Nelson, Hardcastle, Gwinn, Stewart
of Baltimore city, Brent of Baltimore city, Sher-
wood of Baltimore city. Ware, Neill, John New-
comer, Harbine, Hollyday, Slicer, Parke and
Brown— 28.
So the amendment to the amendment was
adopted. |
