Nays.—Messrs. Goldsborough, President,
Greene, Hebb, Wickard, Robinette, Miller,
Stockbridge, Stirling, Cushing, Audoun,
Berry of Baltimore county, Hoffman, Parker,
King, Larsh, Ecker, Swope, Wooden, Earle,
Smith of Dorchester, Keefer, Annan, Baker,
Cunningham, Schlosser, Galloway, McComas,
Hopper, Russell, Hopkins, Chambers, Holly-
day, Clarke, Berry of Prince George's, Lee,
Brown, Wilmer, Horsey, Mullikin, Dellinger,
Nyman, Negley, Maryland, Davis, Sneary,
Smith of Worcester, Purnell, Farrow, Mur-
ray—49.
So the order wag rejected.
Mr. DANIEL submitted the following order :
Ordered, That when this Convention ad-
journs, it stands adjourned until Monday next
at 12 o'clock.
Mr. CUSHING. I think the vote we have
just had, has proved that this House does not
desire to adjourn over to-day until any day
next week. I think it is consuming the time
of the Convention to go over a subject which
has been acted upon. I would inquire if this
is in order.
The PRESIDENT. The former proposition
did not designate any particular hour, and
this is a different proposition, and in order.
The yeas and nays were demanded and
were ordered. The question being taken, the
result was—yeas 26; nays 47—as follows :
Teas—Messrs. Greene, Hebb, Miller, Har-
wood, Bond, Henkle, Hatch, Daniel, Abbott,
Thomas, Turner, Parran, Carter, Noble;
Smith of Dorchester, Markey. Hopkins,
Sykes, Chambers, Lansdale, Peter, Belt,
Marbury, Morgan, Jones of Somerset, Smith
or Worcester—26.
Nays—Messrs. Goldsborough, President;
Wickard, Robinette, Stockbridge, Stirling,
Cushing, Audoun, Berry of Baltimore county,
Hoffman, Parker, King, Larsh, Ecker, Swope,
Wooden, Earle, Scott, Pugh, Todd, Johnson,
Keefer, Annan, Baker, Cunningham, Schlos-
ser) Galloway, McComas, Hopper, Russell,
Blackiston, Hollyday, Clarke, Berry of Prince
George's, Lee, Brown, Wilmer, Horsey, Mul-
likin, Dellinger, Nyman, Negley, Mayhugh,
Davis, Sneary, Purnell, Farrow, Murray—47.
So the order was rejected.
EMANCIPATION.
On motion of Mr. CLARKE.
The Convention proceeded to the consider-
ation of the following order submitted by him
on yesterday:
Ordered, That all subjects connected with
emancipation and the colored population of
the State, be referred lo the Committee on the
. Declaration of Rights
Mr. CLARKE, I stated yesterday, when 1
offered this order, that it was done to carry
out what I supposed was the understanding
of the gentleman who was the chairman of
the committee on that subject, (Mr. Stirling,
When the various standing committees were
appointed, several gentlemen had some doubt |
where this whole subject of the colored popu-
lation belonged. Yesterday, when the ques-
tion was again before the Convention, it was
claimed by two committees that the subject
belonged partially to one and partially to the
other. My sole object in offering the order
was that there might be some understanding
with reference to this question of what com-
mittee had the subject under consideration, so
that gentlemen might know where to refer
any propositions they might have to offer. I
do nut now desire to enter into any discussion
upon the question. When it does come up, a
shall meet it with a spirit of frankness, as I
question that concerns all the people of the
State. I will only say that after conference
with the chairman of the Committee on the
Declaration of Rights, I really thought that
committee would properly consider the sub-
ject in all its various branches, it is a ques-
tion of importance to the people whom I rep-
resent, what is to be the future of this popu-
lation; whether, if free, they are to remain
permanently in the State of Maryland, or
whether provisions ore to be made in refer-
ence to their removal, bow the old and the
young are to be provided for, whether they
are to be turned loose on the community and
the counties are to be taxed, or whether some
system, like a system of apprenticeship, is to
be adopted, until they arrive at a certain age.
There are also various other considerations of
grave importance to the citizens of my coun-
ty, in reference to provisions hereafter, what-
ever may be done now upon this subject ;—
whether the colored people who have left this
State and moved into the District of Colum-
bia, the law taking effect upon them there,
have a right to return, not being forbidden
under the provisions of the code from return-
ing, or whether we shall adopt some provision
forbidding their return, or some provision
similar to that enacted in the constitutions of
various free States, entirely prohibiting this
population from coming into the State.
I humbly conceive that the Committee on
the Declaration of Rights have various ab-
struse principles of government to discuss
which underlies and are the basis of all gov-
erment, and which may take up all their
time. Or if they consider those questions
first which properly belong to the Committee
on the Declaration of Rights, it will be late
in the session before we shall have a report
on this subject. My constituents, as agricul-
turists, feel a deep interest in this subject, to
know what provision to make for their crop,
for their labor; and they desire to have a
committee to which these propositions may be
submitted.
I would also inquire, whether, if the Com-
mittee on the Declaration of Rights should
determine to provide for this subject by a
provision like that commonly known as the
Jefferson Ordinance, it would not leave these
other questions to go to some other commit- |
