in order to move to strike out any portion of
it. You can add to it, but you cannot strike
out any portion of it.
Mr. CLARKE. As I understand it, after a
proposition has been substantially adopted
as a section, you can reach it for amendmen
only by a reconsideration. But the question
before the convention on Wednesday last was
first the proposition lo amend the section re-
ported by the select committee by striking out
the latter clause relating to submitting the
question to the people, and inserting—
"Provided further, that no sale or contract
of sale of the State's interest in the Chesapeake
and Ohio canal company shall go into effect
until the same shall be ratified by the ensuing
general assembly."
Then the gentleman from Baltimore city
(Mr. Stirling) moved to amend the amend-
ment by striking out all after the words
"provided further, " and inserting—
"That the State's interest in the Chesa-
peake and Ohio canal, the Chesapeake and
Delaware canal, 'and the Susquehanna, and
Tide Water canal, shall be exempt from said
sale."
And a separate vole was taken upon each
clause of that proposition. But it was only
adopted as an amendment to an amendment,
but it was never adopted by the house, and in-
corporated in the article as a section. Three
votes were taken upon the three branches of
the proposition of the gentleman from Balti-
more city (Mr. Stirling,) and it was adopted
as an amendment to my amendment, which
was the one offered by the gentleman from
Frederick (Mr. Schley,) and accepted by me.
I think that is the state of the case. And
therefore I suppose the gentleman from Alle-
gany (Mr. Hebb) will withdraw the point of
order he has raised.
Mr. CLARKE continued: If you will turn to
the vote taken, (found page 362,) it appears
that—
"On motion of Mr. BRISCOE, the subject was
divided.
"The question being on the adoption of the
first clause of the amendment to the amend-
ment, viz: to except the Chesapeake and Ohio
Canal.
"Mr. HEBB demanded the yeas and naya,the
demand being sustained, the yeas and nays
were called.
"So the question upon its adoption was de-
cided in the affirmative.
"The question next being on the second
clause of the amendment to the amend-
ment, to except the Chesapeake and Delaware
Canal.
"Mr. MILLER demanded the yeas and nays,
the demand being sustained, the yeas and nays
were called,
" So the question upon its adoption was de-
cided in the affirmative.
"The question next being on the adoption
of the last clause of the amendment to the |
f amendment, to except the Tide Water Canal
e Company.
" Mr. MILLER demanded the yeas and nays,
a the demand being sustained, the yeas and nays
were called,
t "So the question upon its adoption was de-
cided in the affirmative. "
The house therefore by separate votes,adop-
ted each clause of the amendment submit-
ted by the gentleman from Baltimore (Mr.
Stirling) as an amendment to my proposition.
Therefore,the vote was only taken upou it in sep-
arate clauses, as an amendment to the amend-
ment. By that vote Mr. Stirling's proposi-
tion took the place of my proposition, which
1 accepted when offered as an amendment by
the gentleman from Frederick (Mr. Schley.)
Before the proposition of the gentleman from
Baltimore city becomes a part of section 39,
it also must be adopted and a vote taken upon
it. It is now only adopted as an amendment
to an amendment, and is not incorporated into
the section. To this amendment now pend-
ing, I offer an amendment which is certainly
ill order, there being only one amendment to
the section now pending.
Mr. STIRLING. T'he president of the conven-
tion has certainly ruled the other way. The
ge^ntleman from Prince George's (Mr. Clarke)
^ moves to ameud the amenedment by striking
outthat which the house has determined should
be put into that amendment, in order to put in
something else.
The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Purnell.) The chair is
under the impression lhat in that view the
amendment is outof order. It can bereached
by a reconsideration.
Mr. STIRLING. 1 find the parliamentary rule
very clearly laid down in Cushing's Manual:
" If it is proposed to amend by inserting a
paragraph, and the amendment prevails, it
cannot be afterwards moved to strike out the
same words or a part of them; hut it may be
moved to strike out the same wo^rds with oth-
era, or a part of the same words with others,
provided thecoherence heauch as to make these
propositions really different from the first "
Mr, NEGLEY T'hatis exactly the rule under
which this is in order. What is the proposi-
tion before the house? It is a proposition to
amend the amendment of thegent^leman from
Prince George's (Mr. Clarke) as amended by
the gentleman fromBaltim^^re city (Mr. Stil-
ling.) We have before the house this section,
and the amendment of the gentleman from
Prince George's as amended; a section and an
amendment. It is perfectly competent, now
that the amendment of the geutleman from
Baltimore city has been incorporated in the
amendment of the gentlemau from Prince
George's, so that there is only one amend-
ment pending, to propose an amendment; for
it is only an amendment to an amendment.
1 submit that it is perfectly competent for a
legislative body to amend an amendment three
or four times. When they have an amend- |
