Ridgely, Russell, Sands, Schley, Smith, of
Worcester, Stirling, Stockbridge, Swope,
Sykes, Thomas, Todd, Valliant, Wickard,
Wooden—51.
Nays—Messrs. Belt, Billingsley, Blackis-
ton, Briscoe, Brown, Chambers, Clarke,
Dennis, Dent, Duvall, Hollyday, Horsey,
Lee, Morgan, Parran, Smith, of Dorchester
—16.
The report of the committee on the legis-
lative department was accordingly passed.
BASIS OF REPRESENTATION.
On motion of Mr. STOCKBRIDGE,
The report of the committee on the basis
of representation was taken up and read the
third time by its title.
Mr. CUSHING moved that so much be con-
sidered the third reading of the report.
Mr. BILLINGSLEY objected..
Mr. CUSHING. I make that motion, and
ask that the question be taken.
Mr. CHAMBERS. Will it be in order to
adopt that course? Is a matter of such vital
interest, embracing a portion of the article
on the legislative department, to be taken up
and disposed of without having a single sec-
tion of it read? Are we to have no chance
to consider the question of the basis of rep-
resentation? When gentlemen are sensible
that injury is done to my own county by the
system, are they to take up the system and
drive it through without a word? To us it
is a serious affair. The constitution is to
operate nominally for all time. It is to effect
all classes of people, in a way that cannot
be avoided except bycalling another conven-
tion or some such trouble. If we here are not
able to devote half an hour to understanding
whether an article that is to be passed, and
which has occupied days upon days, and
nights, too, I may say, is just to all parts of
the State, I protest against such a mode of
proceeding. I hope it will not be sanctioned
by the convention,
Mr. BRISCOE demanded led the yeas and nays,
and they were ordered.
Mr. HEBB, I hope the gentleman will
withdraw the motion. It will take as long
to call the yeas and nays as to read the re-
port.
Mr. CUSHING. I decline to withdraw it,
.because if the report is read through there
will be motions made to amend, and there
will be two votes to be taken upon which the
yeas and nays will be called where we
shall have one now.
The question being taken, the result was—
yeas 13, nays 52—as follows :
Yeas—Messrs. Goldsborough, President;
Audoun, Baker, Barron, Brooks, Cushing,
Farrow, Hatch, Hebb, Kennard, McComas,
Mullikin, Swope—13.
Nays— Messrs. Abbott, Belt, Billingsley,
Blackiston, Briscoe Brown, Chambers,
Clarke, Cunningham, Daniel, Davis, of |
Washington, Dellinger, Dennis, Dent, Du-
vall, Earle, Ecker, Galloway, Greene, Hoff-
man, Hollyday, Hopkins, Hopper, Horsey,
Jones, of Cecil, Keefer, King, Larsh, Lee,
Markey, Mayhugh, Morgan, Murray, Negley,
Parker, Parran, Pugh, Purnell, Ridgely, Rus-
sell, Sands, Schley, Smith, of Dorchester,
Smith, of Worcester. Stirling, Stockbridge,
Bikes, Thomas, Todd, Valliant, Wickard,
Wooden—52.
When their names were called,
Mr. DANIEL said: As I think i: is some-
times absolutely necessary for us to make
corrections in these reports, I think they
ought to be read through, and I therefore
vote "no."
Mr. MAYHUGH said: The people of all parts
of the State are interested in this. Besides,
I think it is proper and right that all these
reports should be read through the third
time. There might as well be no such
thing as a third reading if all the reports are
to be hastily passed through in this manner.
Some members might suggest something
which requires alteration. It would take no
more time to read it than to call the yeas
and nays. I vote "no,"
The motion was accordingly rejected.
The report was read the third time.
Mr, HOLLYDAY. I move to amend the re-
port so as to give Kent county two repre-
sentatives instead of one. We are now pay-
ing a much larger tax than Caroline county,
which has two, and our income tax is much
greater. We have a larger number of votes,
I think, and still we only have one repre-
sentative. I think we are entitled to two
representatives, and I hope the convention
will give us that number.
Mr. SANDS. I would be glad, from the
facts which have come to my knowledge
since the adoption of this report by the con-
vention upon its second reading, if the con-
vention would consider favorably the amend-
ment made by the gentleman from Kent (Mr.
Hollyday.) The county stands now, as our
statistics show us, within one hundred or so
of being entitled to two representatives in
point of population, and as stated by my
friend in other matters, in point of property, so
far as that has a right to representation, she is
rather in advance of some other counties that
now have two representatives. I know we
have a great many friends in Kent who
would esteem it as an act of great injustice if
we were to leave them with a single repre-
sentative.
1 am not sure that any county should have
less than two, because the sickness or inevit-
able absence of a single member would al-
ways leave the county unrepresented. Es-
pecially as the county of Kent approaches so
very near the number which would entitle
her to two, it may be less than a year, or six
months before she will be entitled in point of
numbers to two—I would like it if our |
