in error in the argument he has urged, I
know that the Constitution requires that in
the Senate, consisting of 22 members, every
bill before it is passed must receive at least 12
votes. And the 29th Rule of the House of
Delegates is as follows :
"The question on the final passage of a
bill shall always be determined by yeas and
nays, which shall be recorded on the journal ;
and unless it shall thus appear that a majori-
ty of the whole number of members elected to
the House have voted in the affirmative, the
bill shall be declared rejected."
That is the rule adopted for the govern-
ment of the last House of Delegates, audit is
a rule which is well adapted for the govern-
ment of all deliberative bodies, more particu-
larly for the government of a Convention
called for the purpose of framing the organic
law. It is but just and proper that in amat-
ter in which every man in the State is inter-
ested, each article of that organic law should
not only receive the earnest and careful con-
sideration of every member of the Conven-
tion, but upon its final passage it should re-
ceive the sanction of a majority of all the
members elected to that body. Such a rule
will prevent hasty action upon provisions of
the Constitution; and if it is adopted we will
have a much better Constitution prepared for
this State than we will otherwise have. The
bill calling this Convention provided that no
Convention at all should be held unless 65
members were elected; and that of those 65
members elected at least 50 should be required
to constitute a quorum for the transaction of
business. Now I am perfectly willing to vote
for a rule that not less than amajority of the
members elected to this body—that is 49
members—shall vote affirmatively to secure
the passage of any measure. I think that
should be required as a matter of precaution,
and then we shall have some safeguard for
the action of this body. And we shall not
have that safeguard unless some such rule bo
adopted. But if the amendment proposed by
the gentleman from Allegany (Mr. Thruston)
be adopted, then with but 50 members
present, 26 members of the 96 of which this
Convention is composed, may adopt any ar-
ticle of the Constitution, no matter how. im-
portant it may be to the people of this State.
I hope, therefore, his amendment will not be
adopted.
Mr. MILLER. In addition to what has been
said by my friend from Prince George's (Mr.
Berry) I would call attention to the fact that
the rule of the Senate and the rule ' of the
House of Delegates, which have been re-
ferred to, were adopted in pursuance of the
Constitution of the State, which provides
that each bill shall be passed by the affir-
mative votes of a majority of members elected
to each House. The Convention which
framed that Constitution deemed it import-
ant that no bill, however local or unimport- |
ant, should become a law unless a majority
of all the members elected to the Senate and
to the House of Delegates should vote for it.
And I consider it far more important that
the same rule should be maintained here
when we are to pass upon such an important
matter as a change in tire organic law of our
State, and to adopt measures in which the
people will be much more deeply interested
than the passage of any mere bills by the
Legislature,
if gentlemen upon the other side, who are
advocating the amendment now proposed,
will refer to the 44th Rule—the one immedi-
ately succeeding the rule underconsideration
—they will find that in case a report upon
any article tor subject matter be lost for want
of a majority of the members elected, they
may at any time move a reconsideration and
bring the matter before the body again for
its action. So that if any article of the
Constitution, or any subject matter, meet
the approval of a majority of the members
elected to this Convention, even if it be once
rejected by want of a majority of the mem-
bers elected, it can be reached by a motion
to reconsider which can be adopted by a
majority of the members present at any time.
But no measure will be passed finally except
by a vote of a majority of all the members
elected. This rule is a good one, and I hope
the convention will adhere to It as it has
been reported.
Mr. SANDS. I am not surprised that the
rule referred to is in the rules of the House
of Delegates because the Constitution de-
manded that it should be placed there. But
the framers of that Constitution also put in
the Constitution other thing's which the peo-
ple think ought to be amended and corrected,
things which I believe the people are anxious
to see stricken out of the Constitution.
Now we are here under a special act, with
no Constitutional inhibitions or prohibitions
upon our action in regard to the adoption of
rules for our own government. I think the
primary object of this body should be to so
erect its running machinery as to attain the
ends contemplated by the people in the most
direct and speedy manner. Now in the clause
of the act declaring what shall constitute a
quorum of this body, I can find nothing con-
templating a restriction of this Convention in
relation to the rules under which we may
propose to act, nothing, whatsoever; neither
in the Constitution now in force, nor in the
law under it, is there anything by which this
body is tethered or hindered in its action.
Now in the construction of our rules of gov-
ernment, what are we to do? We are to adopt
those rules which in our clearest and best
judgment are the best calculated to facilitate
the. public business, and we are entirely un-
restricted in this matter either by the Consti-
tution of the State, or by the act under
which we are assembled. Now I have as much |
