The convention took a recess until half
past 3 o'clock, P. M.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
The convention met at half past 3 o'clock,
P. M.
The roll was called, and the following
members answered to their names :
Messrs. Goldsborough, President; Abbott,
Annan, Audoun, Baker, Barron, Billingsley,
Blackiston, Bond, Brooks, Carter, Chambers,
Cunningham, Cushing, Daniel, Davis, of
Washington, Dellinger, Dennis, Dent, Duvall,
Earle, Ecker, Farrow, Galloway, Greene,
Hatch, Hebb, Hoffman, Hollyday, Hopkins,
Horsey, Keefer, Kennard, King, Larsh, Lee,
Markey, Mayhugh, McComas, Miller, Morgan,
Mullikin, Murray, Negley, Nyman, Parker,
Parran, Pugh, Purnell, Ridgely, Russell,
Sands, Schley, Scott, Smith, of Carroll,
Smith, of Dorchester, Smith, of Worcester,
Stirling, Stockbridge, Swope, Sykes, Thomas,
Todd, Turner, Wickard, Wooden—66.
Mr. SCOTT. I move that the fiftieth rule be
put in force.
Mr. STIRLING. I should like to know the
object of that. We have sixty members
here; and it will delay the progress of the
house. It interferes with the progress of the
business.
Mr. SCOTT withdrew the motion.
BASIS OF REPRESENTATIONS.
The convention resumed the consideration
of the report of the committee on the basis of
representation, on its third reading; the
pending question being the motion of Mr.
HOLLYDAY to open the report for the purpose
of so amending it as to allow Kent county
two representatives.
The PRESIDENT. At the time the gentle-
man from Cecil (Mr. Pugh) moved to sus-
pend the fifty-third rule, the chair was under
the impression that at that stage of the pro-
ceedings the motion was not in order. The
chair is now of opinion that it is competent
to suspend the rule; but that it requires a
vote of three-fifths of the members present,
as required by the forty-ninth rule.
Mr. PUGH renewed the motion to suspend
the fifty-third rule.
Mr. ABBOTT demanded the yeas and nays,
and they were ordered.
The question being taken, the result was—
yeas 40, nays 26—as follows :
Yeas—Messrs. Goldsborough, President ;
Billingsley, Blackiston, Bond, Briscoe, Dan-
iel, Dennis, Dent, Duvall, Earle, Galloway,
Greene, Hoffman, Hollyday, Hopkins, Horsey,
King, Larsh, Lee, Markey, Miller, Morgan,
Mullikin, Nyman, Parker, Parran, Pugh,
Purnell, Ridgely, Sands, Scott, Smith, of
Carroll, Smith, of Dorchester, Smith, of
Worcester, Stirling, Swope, Sykes, Thomas,
Todd, Turner—40.
Nays—Messrs. Abbott, Annan, Audoun, |
Baker, Barron, Brooks. Carter, Cunningham,
Cushing, Davis, of Washington, Dellinger,
Ecker, Farrow, Hatch, Hebb, Keefer, Ken-
nard, Mayhugh, McComas, Murray, Negley,
•Russell, Schley, Stockbridge, Wickard,
Wooden—26.
The fifty-third rule was accordingly suspended,
three fifths of the members present
having voted for its suspension.
The question recurred upon the motion to
open the report to the amendment moved by
Mr, HOLLYDAY.
The question being taken, the result was—
ayes 37, noes not counted.
The motion was accordingly declared
adopted.
Mr, HOLLYDAY moved to amend the third
section of the report by striking out " one,"
in the eighteenth line and inserting "two,"
so as to give Kent county two representa-
tives.
Mr. CUSHING. I wish to inquire whether,
the fifty-third rule having been suspended,
this report can be amended, in parliamentary
law, upon the third reading, excepting by
unanimous consent. Is there any rule au-
thorizing the amendment upon the third
reading except the fifty-third rule, which we
have suspended ?
The PRESIDENT. The fifty-third rule was
only suspended for this particular occasion.
Mr. CUSHING. But being suspended for this
particular occasion we fall back upon the gen-
eral parliamentary practice, which is that the
report cannot beamended upon the third read-
ing, In congress, for instance, no bill can
be amended upon its third reading.
Mr. PUGH. I will answer the gentleman,
so far as I understand this matter. My im-
pression is that this is a convention assem-
bled here to make a constitution. Among
other things it adopted for its government
a certain set of rules. One of those rules
provides that for the accomplishment of any
special purpose the convention may, inde-
pendent of all parliamentary law, suspend
one of its rules or all of its rules. The con-
vention under that rule has suspended
another rule for a special purpose, in con-
formity with the rules and not outside of the
rules. My objection to the argument of the
gentleman from Baltimore city (Mr, Cush-
ing) is just this. He claims, or suggests to
the chair that we have gone beyond the pale
of the rules—that we are beyond the work-
ing of the rules—that having suspended this
rule we are thrown back upon parliamentary
law. My answer is that we are acting
strictly in conformity with the rules. Under
one of the rules adopted by this body we
suspend another rule for a special purpose.
In conformity with the rules we have sus-
pended one of them. The ground taken by
the gentleman from Baltimore city is that
we are not now acting under the operation
of these rules because we have suspended one |
