amendment in this form:—"except the rule
of the House of Delegates relating to the call
of the previous question."
Mr. STIRLING. I see no objection to that.
Mr. CLARKE. That leaves the previous
question subject to the ordinary rules of legis-
lative bodies. If we have no previous ques-
tion under the ordinary rules of legislative
bodies, I desire that this Convention should
stand in that position until we get a report
from the committee.
Mr. DANIEL. I believe that there is no other
previous question provided for by parliamen-
tary law, except in the manner provided for
by the rules of the House of Delegates. I do
not think this Convention ought to deprive
itself of that power. It may be a necessary
power. I trust that each member of this Con-
vention will extend a due courtesy to the other
members. But we do not know when this
committee will report, and I do not think it
is proper for the Convention to deprive itself
of the power of calling the previous question.
Mr. KENNARD. As the mover of the reso-
lution, I think it proper to say that it was
after deliberation that I came to the conclusion
to omit the two classes of rules referred to, as
having been excepted by the last Convention.
We do not know how long the report of the
committee may be delayed, and I should prefer
that the resolution should be adopted as origin-
ally offered by me.
Mr. SCHLEY. I confess I do not understand
why any one of the rules of the House of
Delegates should be proposed to be excepted
particularly at this time. I am free to con-
fess that I do not know what is the rule of the
House of Delegates relative to the previous
question without reference. I do not know,
and desire to be instructed, what is this rule
that it is proposed to except from the ordinary
rules of the House of Delegates, that may be
applicable to the deliberations of this Conven-
tion. I shall oppose the amendment until
better informed, and until I can see some rea-
son for the exception. As the other proposi-
tion, relative to the two-thirds rule, has been
withdrawn, it is unnecessary for me to refer
to that.
Mr. HEBB. I am opposed to the amendment
offered by the gentleman from Prince George's,
for the reason that it will deprive the Conven-
tion of the privilege of calling the previous
question when the rules come up for conside-
ration. It may be necessary then to go into a
long discussion upon the rules, and it may be-
come necessary to call the previous question
upon their adoption. I am opposed therefore
to the amendment, and in favor of the origi-
nal motion.
Mr. BARRON. If we are to take the rules of
the House of Delegates we would better take
them all, or none.
Mr. SANDS. While I shall oppose the
amendment of the gentleman from Prince
George's, I for one shall not make any use of |
the previous question for the purpose of chok-
ing off fair debate on any proposition that
may arise in this body. I make this remark
now, sir, that we may have an understanding
in the start. There are very grave questions
which must come before us. I want to hear
all that can besaid upon them. I do not fear,
so far as I am concerned, debate, or a fair
hearing upon any question which shall come
before us. We are here, in our humble de-
gree to form public sentiment in consonance
with the organic law which we propose to
form for the State. Truth cam do no harm.
Light can shut out no principles from any
one. I am for a full discussion, a free hear-
ing, and a fair settlement of all questions
which can come before this body. I make
these remarks to assure gentlemen who may
perhaps entertain views differing from mine,
that while my own views, at least to my own
satisfaction, are matured, I want to bear the
views of all gentlemen. I am not afraid that
whatever is said here, for or against, should go
these remarks to notify gentlemen who may
to our great jury—the people. I merely make
entertain views differing from mine that while
I shall vote against this amendment, it is not
for the purpose of cutting off fair debate.
Mr. CLARKE. The reason for offering the
amendment to the proposition of the gentle-
man from Baltimore city (Mr. Kennard) is
this. The rule of the House of Delegates, is
the 23d rule, to be found on page 7, and is
thus:
"The previous question shall be in this
form, '' Shall the main question he now put ?"
It may be called for on any question except
on an amendment or other matter which can-
not in its nature be postponed; and when
demanded by a majority of the members
present, it shall, until it is decided, preclude
all further amendment and debate on the
main question."
On referring to the Journal of the Proceed-
ings of the last Constitutional Convention, I
find that in adopting these rules, the Conven-
tion at the outset provided in the adoption of
that order, that the rules of the House of Dele-
gates should not apply, so far as calling the
previous question was concerned. I accept
the remarks of the gentleman from Howard
(Mr. Sands) as no doubt bearing the true
interpretation of the sense of this body that
there is no desire on its part to cut off true
and proper and legitimate debate. But cer-
tainly, having seen that this is the rule which
was adopted by the last Convention, and
knowing further that it may be some time
before we may get a report from this com-
mittee, it being possible that even during the
whole session of this Convention these may
be the rules by which we shall be governed,
and that we may be able to agree upon no
rules of order, knowing also that important
questions may be before this body prior to the
adoption of rules of order by this Convention |
