|
|
|
116
The yeas and nays were called and appeared as follows:
AFFIRMATIVE.
Messrs. Abbott, Hoffman, Pugh;
Annan, Hopkins, Purnell,
Baker, Hopper, Robinette,
Barren, Jones, of Cecil, Russell,
Carter, Keefer, Sands,
Cunningham, Kennard, Schley,
Cushing, King, Sneary,
Daniel, Larsh, Stirling,
Davis, of Wash. Markey, Sykes,
Dellinger, McComas, Thruston,
Ecker, Mullikin, Todd,
Farrow, Murray, Valliant,
Galloway, Negley, Wickard,
Greene, Noble, Wooden—44.
Hebb, Nyman,
NEGATIVE.
Messrs. Clarke, Marbury,
Goldsborough, ?'t Crawford, Mitchell,
Audoun, Davis, of Charles, Miller,
Belt, ' Duvall, Morgan,
Berry, of Balt. co. Earle, Parker,
Berry, of P. Geo. Edelen, Parran,
Billingsley, Harwood, Peter,
Blackiston, Henkle, Scott,
Bond, Horsey, Smith of Car.
Briscoe, Johnson, Smith, of Dor.
Brooks, Jones, of Som. Thomas,
Brown, Lansdale, Wilmer—37.
Chambers, Lee,
So the question upon its adoption was decided in the affir-
mative.
Mr. Clarke, of Prince George's, appealed from the decision
of the Chair, declaring the amendment of the Standing Rules
offered by the gentleman from Baltimore city adopted by a
vote of 44 in the affirmative and 37 in the negative, upon the
ground that the Rules of Order having been adopted by a
majority of the members elected to this Convention, they can
only be changed by a vote of the majority of the members
elected to the Convention, and upon the ground that accord-
ing to parliamentary practice, where it takes a majority of
the members elected to any deliberative body to adopt a rule,
it requires the same number to change or repeal.
Mr. Daniel moved to lay the appeal on the table.
|
|
|
|
 |
