Galloway, Hatch, Hebb, Hoffman, Hopkins
Hopper, Jones, of Cecil, Keefer, Kennard
King, Larsh, Mace, McComas, Mullikin,
Murray, Negley, Noble, Nyman, Parker
Pugh, Purnell, Ridgely, Robinette, Russell
Sands, Schley, Scott, Smith, of Carroll,
Smith, of Worcester, Sneary, Stirling, Stock-
bridge, Swope, Sykes, Thomas, Todd, Val-
liant, Wickard, Wooden—53.
So the amendment was rejected.
Mr. BARRON moved the previous question
Mr. DAVIS, of Charles, raised the question
of order.
The PRESIDENT. If it had not been for the
order adopted by the Convention on the 14th
instant, this motion would be in order. But
the House seems to have determined by that
order to admit the further privilege of offer-
ing amendments, accompanied with the privi-
lege granted to each speaker of five minutes
for the purpose of explaining his amendment.
The Chair can only understand that order
as a suspension of the standing rule of the
House.
Mr. KENNARD, Is it in the power of the
Convention by such an order to suspend the
standing rule of the House?
The PRESIDENT. It is not usual. Under
the rules they can only be changed upon
giving one day's notice. But it is in the
power of the House at any time to determine
what it will do with any particular subject;
and the President must abide the determi-
nation of the House until it is reversed.
Whether it operates as a suspension of the
rule or not, was for the House to determine,
and not for the President. Until the order
is reconsidered it stands as the judgment of:
the House.
Mr. SANDS moved to reconsider the order
adopted on the 14th instant respecting final
action upon the 4th article of the Declaration
of Rights
Mr. CLARKE. I think there are only three
or four amendments to beoffered. Probably
we can finish them all in less time than we
could reconsider.
Mr. STIRLING. I hope the order will not
be reconsidered. If it were the intention to
consume the time, there would be a contest
upon that. I understand that there are only
three or four amendments to be offered, and
that there will be no debate, and then the
question can be taken.
Mr. BELT. I desire to submit a proposition
embodying what I regard as the naked truth
upon this subject. I do not wish the yeas
and nays upon it; but only to place it on the
record.
Mr. JONES, of Somerset, demanded the yeas
and nays on the motion to reconsider; and
they were ordered.
The question being taken, the result was—
yeas 49, nays 35—as follows :
Yeas—Messrs. Goldsborough, President ;
Abbott, Annan, Baker, Barron, Brooks, Cun- |
ningham, Cushing, Daniel, Davis, of Wash-
ington, Dellinger, Earle, Ecker, Farrow, Gal-
loway, Hatch, Hebb, Hoffman, Hopkins, Hop-
per, Jones, of Cecil, Keefer, King, Larsh,
McComas, Mullikin, Murray, Negley, Noble,
Nyman, Parker, Pugh, Purnell, Ridgely,
Robinette, Russell, Sands, Schley, Scott,
Smith, of Carroll, Smith, of Worcester,
Sneary, Swope, Sykes, Thomas, Todd, Val-
liant, Wickard. Wooden—49.
Nays—Messrs. Belt, Berry, of P. George's,
Billingsley, Blackiston, Bond, Briscoe, Brown,
Chambers, Clarke, Crawford, Dail, Davis, of
Charles, Duvall, Edelen, Gale, Harwood,
Henkle, Hollyday, Horsey, Jones, of Somer-
set, Kennard, Lansdale, Lee, Mace, Marbury,
Mitchell, Miller, Morgan, Parran, Peter,
Smith, of Dorchester, Stirling, Stockbridge,
Turner, Wilmer—35.
So the vote adopting the order was recon-
sidered .
The question recurring upon the adoption
of the order,
Mr. HEBB moved to lay the order upon the
table.
Mr. MILLER demanded the yeas and nays,
and they were ordered.
The question being taken, the result was—
yens 52, nays 32—as follows:
Yeas—Messrs. Goldsborough, President ;
Abbott, Annan, Baker, Barron, Brooks, Cun-
ningham, Cushing, Daniel, Davis, of Wash-
ington, Dellinger, Earle, Ecker, Farrow,
Galloway, Hatch, Hebb, Hoffman, Hopkins,
Hopper, Jones, of Cecil, Keefer, Kennard,
King, Larsh, Mace, McComas, Mullikin, Mur-
ray, Negley, Noble, Nyman, Parker, Pugh,
Purnell, Ridgely, Robinette, Russell, Sands,
Schley, Scott, Smith, of Carroll, Smith, of
Worcester, Sneary, Stirling, Swope, Sykes,
Thomas, Todd, Valliant, Wickard, Wooden
—52.
Nays—Messrs. Belt, Berry, of P.George's,
Billingsley, Blackiston, Bond, Briscoe, Brown,
Chambers, Clarke, Dail, Davis, of Charles,
Dennis, Duvall, Edelen, Gale, Harwood,
Henkle, Hollyday, Horsey, Jones, of Somer-
set, Lansdale, Lee, Marbury, Mitchell, Miller,
Morgan, Parran, Peter, Smith, of Dorchester,
Stockbridge, Turner, Wilmer—32.
So the order limiting the debate was laid
upon the table,
Mr. BARRON moved the previous question ;
and the motion was sustained.
Mr. DAVIS, of Charles, moved that the Con-
vention adjourn.
The motion was rejected.
The main question was then put, upon the
adoption of the 4th article of the Declara-tion
of Rights, as reported from the com-
mittee.
Mr. BERRY, of Prince George's, demanded
the yeas and nays, and they were ordered.
The question being taken, the result was—
yeas 53, nays 32—as follows :
Yeas—Messrs. Goldsborough, President ; |
