|
|
|
363
The question being on the adoption of the amendment
submitted by Mr. Chambers,
Mr. Chambers demanded the yeas and nays.
The demand being sustained,
The yeas and nays were called, and appeared as follows:
AFFIRMATIVE.
Messrs. ' Dennis, Jon es of Somerset,
Goldsborough, P't Duvall, Miller,
Berry, of P. Geo., Farrow, Morgan,
Blackiston, Henkle, Parker,
Briscoe, Hollyday, Parran,
Chambers, Horsey, Peter—17.
NEGATIVE.
Messrs. Harwood, Purnell,
Abbott, Hebb, Ridgely,
Annan, Hodson, Robinette,
Baker, Hopkins, Russell,
Barron, Hopper, Schley,
Bond, Johnson, Smith, of Carroll,
Brown, Jones, of Cecil, Smith, of Dor.,
Clarke, Keefer, Sneary,
Crawford, Kennard, Stirling,
Cushing, King, Stockbridge,
Dail, Lansdale, Swope,
Daniel, Lee, Sykes,
Davis, of Charles, Marbury, Thomas,
Davis, of Wash., Mitchell, Todd,
Earle, Mullikin, Valliant,
Ecker, ' Murray, Wickard,
Edelen, Negley, Wilmer,
Galloway, Nyman, Wooden—55.
Greene, Pugh,
So the question upon its adoption was decided in the
negative.
Mr. Stockbridge submitted the following amendment:
Sec. 2. Amend by striking out all after the word "respec-
tively, " in line 4;
Decided in the negative.
The question then recurring upon the amendment submit-
ted by Mr. Schley:
It was decided in the affirmative.
|
|
|
|
 |
