|
|
|
57
It was decided in the negative.
The question recurring upon the adoption of the original
order, to wit: that when the Convention adjourns to-morrow,
it adjourn until Wednesday next,
Mr. Hebb demanded the yeas and nays.
The demand being sustained,
The yeas and nays were called, and appeared as follows:
AFFIRMATIVE.
Messrs. Harwood, Dail, Clarke,
Bond, Johnson, Belt,
Henkle, Smith, of Dor., Marbury,
Brooks, Markey, Lee,
Barren, Cunningham, Brown,
Berry, of Balt. co. Schlosser, Wilmer,
Ridgely, Hopkins, Morgan,
King, Sands, Jones, of Som.,
Larsh, Sykes, Crawford,
Swope, Chambers, Horsey,
Jones, of Cecil, Blackiston, Valliant,
Turner, Hollyday, Mayhugh,
Edelen, Lansdale, Davis,
Mitchell, Peter, Sneary—44.
Todd, Duvall,
NEGATIVE.
Messrs. Thomas, Annan,
Goldsborough, P't Parker, Baker,
Hebb, Smith, of Carroll, Galloway,
Thurston, Ecker, McComas,
Wickard, Wooden, Hopper,
Robinette, Earle, Russell,
Miller, Scott, Mullikin,
Kennard, Pugh, Nyman,
Stockbridge, Davis, of Charles, Negley,
Stirling, Carter, Smith, of Wor.,
Daniel, Noble, Purnell,
Abbott, Keefer, Murray—87.
Cushing, Schley,
So the question upon the adoption of the order was decided
in the affirmative.
Mr. Stirling, from the majority of the Committee on the
Bill of Rights, submitted the following report,
Which was read and ordered to be printed:
8
|
|
|
|
 |
