|
|
|
1809 MARYLAND IMPRINTS
|
|
|
|
|
Annapolis, J. W. Butler, l809]
Advertised in the Annapolis Maryland Republican, Aug.
19, 1809, as "Church BillI For sale, Price 12 1/2
Cents, At the Office of the Maryland Republican ... A
complete and correct copy of the Church Bill, reported
by the Federal majority of the House of Delegates at the
November session, 1808."
This bill, passed by the House but rejected by the
Senate (Senate V. & P., Nov. sess. 1808, p. 40), aroused
much controversy. On May 26, 1809, the resolutions com-
mittee presented to the annual convention of the Prot-
estant Episcopal Church a report critical of the action
of the General Assembly in rejecting the bill. For ref-
erence to an anti-Episcopal handbill distributed shortly
before the advertisement above, see item 941.
No copy known. t?55]
Maryland. General Assembly. House of Delegates.
[By the House of Delegates, June 7, 1809. Gentlemen
of the Senate, We propose to go into the appointment of
a senator to represent this state In the senate of the
United States during the constitutional period. ... we
propose, with the concurrence of your house f a confer-
ence, by Joint committee of the two houses.
By the Senate, June 7» 1809. Gentlemen of the House
of Delegates, Conceiving that the mode of electing sena-
tors ... has been fully established ... the senate have
declined acceding to your proposition for the appoint-
ment of a committee of conference. Annapolis, Fred-
erick Green, 1809-,
"Ordered, That five hundred copies of the following
described papers be printed for the use of the members
of this house ... 2d. Our message of the 7th to the
Senate, with their answer."—House V. & P., June sess.
1809, p. 16. On p. 21 appears a second order: "Ordered,
That five hundred copies of all the proceedings and en-
tries on the journals of this house during this session,
relative to the appointment of a senator to represent
this state in the senate of the United States, Including
the yeas and nays on each question, in the order of time
in which they appear on the Journals, be printed for the
use of the members, and forwarded in the usual manner." '
This action was taken on June 10, the day of adjourn-
ment. It is not clear whether it was intended to re-
scind the previous action and combine all the proceed-
221
|
|
|
 |
