at any time demand them-the Convention being in committee of the whole, it would be the duty of their Secretary to act as clerk. He was afraid that if the proposed clause were inserted, it might seem to countenance the idea that other committees were not obliged to keep minutes.He therefore hoped that the amendment would not be adopted.

Mr. BROWN, of Philadelphia, was glad that the gentleman had given this information, for he (Mr. BROWN) was not aware that that was the rule. He would ask the presiding officer, if it was usual for a Secretary of a Convention, when in committee of the whole, to act as its clerk, and that the minutes taken in committee would be at the disposal of the Convention? If such was the case, why he had nothing further to say on the subject.

The PRESIDENT:

The Chair understands that it has not been the usage to keep minutes while in committee of the whole; but if so directed by the house, it will be done. And those minutes, as has been already remarked, will be subject to the disposition of the house. The practice heretofore does not act as any restraint upon us, and if it be the wish of the Convention, the minutes of what is done in committee of the whole, shall be taken.

Mr. MEREDITH intimated that, at the proper time, he would introduce a rule in relation to the keeping of the minutes.

Mr. BROWN, of Philadelphia, withdrew his amendment.

The question being taken on the adoption of the rule, it was agreed to. The twenty-sixth rule being under consideration,

Mr. EARLE, moved to postpone the further consideration of it for the present, and that when the Convention adjourns, it will adjourn to meet again this afternoon at four o'clock, for the purpose of considering this and the remaining rules yet unconsidered: which was agreed to. Adjourned until four o'clock this afternoon.

AFTERNOON SESSION.

The Convention proceeded to the consideration of the unfinished business of the morning, being the consideration of the twenty-sixth rule. Mr. MEREDITH, of Philadelphia, moved to postpone the consideration of this rule for the purpose of introducing a new rule to be called rule 26th, in the following words:

"Minutes shall be kept of the proceedings of the committee of the whole, and all other committees, and such minutes shall be laid on the table of the Convention when so ordered".

The amendment being under consideration,

Mr. CLARKE, of Indiana, moved to amend the same by adding to it "and when in committee of the whole the yeas and nays may be called at the desire of any ten members and entered on the minutes thereof".

Mr. CLARKE, said he found upon referring to the proceedings of the Convention of 1789-90 that in adopting their rules they had a provision of this kind: Their ninth rule reads as follows: "The yeas and nays shall be called and entered on the minutes of the House, or of the committee of the whole House, when any member requires it". He also found, on looking through the proceedings of that body, the yeas and nays were frequently called and entered on the minutes. Mr.

CLARKE Would state his reasons for making this motion in a very few words. In the committee of the whole there would be no restriction from debate, and he should consider it the best time for a man to record his vote, immediately after the debate was closed, and the taking of the yeas and nays would not consume much time. Besides, he thought if the yeas and nays were taken in committee of the whole, they would not be again asked for in Convention, so that the time lost in calling them in committee would be saved in the Convention. He thought if they were to keep minutes of their proceedings in committee of the whole, to be appended to the minutes of the Convention it would be but fair and proper that the votes should be entered on those minutes so that the people might know the sentiments of their representatives at the time when the discussion of a subject should have just been closed. It was true that in the course of the week the yeas and nays had been frequently called, and in his opinion, at times unnecessarily, so much so, no doubt, that some gentlemen might be afraid that if they could be called in committee of the whole much delay might be occasioned. But in the light he viewed it he thought it would even be a saving of time and in conformity to the practice of former Conventions.

Mr. MEREDITH would have accepted this as a modification, but that he was fearful if the yeas and nays were permitted to be called in committee of the whole, they would frequently be called both there and in the Convention. He had, however, so much respect for the views of the gentleman from Indiana, (Mr. CLARKE) that he would make no opposition to the amendment.

Mr. PORTER, of Northampton, trusted this amendment might not be adopted, because, as he reviewed the matter, it was the right of any two members to call for the yeas and nays in committee of the whole, and have them entered on the minutes without any rule. In the celebrated Olmstead case, as no doubt some gentlemen here would recollect, it was solemnly decided that it was the right of any two members to have the roll called. He did not know what the practice now was, but he recollected the circumstances of this case, and that it was then decided the yeas and nays should be called in committee of the whole.

Mr. CLARKE, of Indiana, said if he was certain that this would be the understanding in the committee of the whole he should withdraw his amendment; but he knew the practice in the Legislature had not been to call the yeas and nays in committee of the whole. He had inserted in the amendment ten members so that they might not be troubled with calls of the yeas and nays on questions of minor importance, but only when they should be desired by ten members, and he apprehended when that number of delegates made such a call it would be on a subject of some importance in itself. He only desired an opportunity of recording his vote when important subjects were before the committee, and when ten men united in calling for the yeas and nays, the probability was that the subject would be of importance. If this motion should meet the approbation of the Convention he should be pleased, but if not he would be satisfied.

Mr. BANKS, of Mifflin, said it would give him pleasure to agree with the gentleman from Indiana in this Convention on all occasions, but so far as he was able to judge they would gain nothing by this amendment.

at any time demand them-the Convention being in committee of the whole, it would be the duty of their Secretary to act as clerk. He was afraid that if the proposed clause were inserted, it might seem to countenance the idea that other committees were not obliged to keep minutes.He therefore hoped that the amendment would not be adopted.

Mr. BROWN, of Philadelphia, was glad that the gentleman had given this information, for he (Mr. BROWN) was not aware that that was the rule. He would ask the presiding officer, if it was usual for a Secretary of a Convention, when in committee of the whole, to act as its clerk, and that the minutes taken in committee would be at the disposal of the Convention? If such was the case, why he had nothing further to say on the subject.

The PRESIDENT: The Chair understands that it has not been the usage to keep minutes while in committee of the whole; but if so directed by the house, it will be done. And those minutes, as has been already remarked, will be subject to the disposition of the house. The practice heretofore does not act as any restraint upon us, and if it be the wish of the Convention, the minutes of what is done in committee of the whole, shall be taken.

Mr. MEREDITH intimated that, at the proper time, he would introduce a rule in relation to the keeping of the minutes.

Mr. BROWN, of Philadelphia, withdrew his amendment.

The question being taken on the adoption of the rule, it was agreed to. The twenty-sixth rule being under consideration,

Mr. EARLE, moved to postpone the further consideration of it for the present, and that when the Convention adjourns, it will adjourn to meet again this afternoon at four o'clock, for the purpose of considering this and the remaining rules yet unconsidered: which was agreed to. Adjourned until four o'clock this afternoon.

AFTERNOON SESSION.

The Convention proceeded to the consideration of the unfinished business of the morning, being the consideration of the twenty-sixth rule. Mr. MEREDITH, of Philadelphia, moved to postpone the consideration of this rule for the purpose of introducing a new rule to be called rule 26th, in the following words:

"Minutes shall be kept of the proceedings of the committee of the whole, and all other committees, and such minutes shall be laid on the table of the Convention when so ordered".

The amendment being under consideration,

Mr. CLARKE, of Indiana, moved to amend the same by adding to it "and when in committee of the whole the yeas and nays may be called at the desire of any ten members and entered on the minutes thereof".

Mr. CLARKE, said he found upon referring to the proceedings of the Convention of 1789-90 that in adopting their rules they had a provision of this kind: Their ninth rule reads as follows:- The yeas and nays shall be called and entered on the minutes of the House, or of the committee of the whole House, when any member requires it". He also found, on looking through the proceedings of that body, the yeas and nays were frequently called and entered on the minutes. Mr.

***

CLARKE would state his reasons for making this motion in a very few words. In the committee of the whole there would be no restriction from debate, and he should consider it the best time for a man to record his vote, immediately after the debate was closed, and the taking of the yeas and nays would not consume much time. Besides, he thought if the yeas and nays were taken in committee of the whole, they would not be again asked for in Convention, so that the time lost in calling them in committee would be saved in the Convention. He thought if they were to keep minutes of their proceedings in committee of the whole, to be appended to the minutes of the Convention it would be but fair and proper that the votes should be entered on those minutes so that the people might know the sentiments of their representatives at the time when the discussion of a subject should have just been closed. It was true that in the course of the week the yeas and nays had been frequently called, and in his opinion, at times unnecessarily, so much so, no doubt, that some gentlemen might be afraid that if they could be called in committee of the whole much delay might be occasioned. But in the light he viewed it he thought it would even be a saving of time and in conformity to the practice of former Conventions.

Mr. MEREDITH would have accepted this as a modification, but that he was fearful if the yeas and nays were permitted to be called in committee of the whole, they would frequently be called both there and in the Convention. He had, however, so much respect for the views of the gentleman from Indiana, (Mr. CLARKE) that he would make no opposition to the amendment.

Mr. PORTER, of Northampton, trusted this amendment might not be adopted, because, as he reviewed the matter, it was the right of any two members to call for the yeas and nays in committee of the whole, and have them entered on the minutes without any rule. In the celebrated Olmstead case, as no doubt some gentlemen here would recollect, it was solemnly decided that it was the right of any two members to have the roll called. He did not know what the practice now was, but he recollected the circumstances of this case, and that it was then decided the yeas and nays should be called in committee of the whole.

Mr. CLARKE, of Indiana, said if he was certain that this would be the understanding in the committee of the whole he should withdraw his amendment; but he knew the practice in the Legislature had not been to call the yeas and nays in committee of the whole. He had inserted in the amendment ten members so that they might not be troubled with calls of the yeas and nays on questions of minor importance, but only when they should be desired by ten members, and he apprehended when that number of delegates made such a call it would be on a subject of some importance in itself. He only desired an opportunity of recording his vote when important subjects were before the committee, and when ten men united in calling for the yeas and nays, the probability was that the subject would be of importance. If this motion should meet the approbation of the Convention he should be pleased, but if not he would be satisfied.

Mr. BANKS, of Mifflin, said it would give him pleasure to agree with the gentleman from Indiana in this Convention on all occasions, but so far as he was able to judge they would gain nothing by this amendment.

, would go for this proposition with pleasure, result from it, or that it would facilitate the ...but it seemed to him that it would rather have Facilitate the business of the body. It would

344

e Secretary much more arduous, and encumone sets of yeas and nays on many proposioxing over the minutes of the Convention of '89was not so well received there, as it was only car

ne Chair. It appeared by the proceedings of de the experiment, having, in the first place, eposed, and afterwards moved a reconsideraconsider was only lost by the casting vote of the ... practice, they might find this rule inconvenient, here would sometimes be such a diversity of opinthat many propositions would be submitted to the ne mover desiring to have the yeas and nays, a dise, and by this means the session of the Convenserably prolonged. He had no objection to calling ane Convention, but he thought they would find it tem in committee of the whole, and that it might

3

a month or more.

y cue, was opposed to this amendment. In commitwas designed to have an unreserved discussion of opinions of others to give opinions, and, if convin..o change. It might so happen that a delegate would .....itice which he would have reason to change aftersubject had been more fully discussed; and he did not ccates to the charge of inconsistency in recording their tion in committee, and against it in the Convention. M& of Philadelphia, was of opinion that they could have the ondays in committee of the whole by the rules as they now stood, hong the amendment, on the mere call of two members; therefore those genthumen who wished to restrain this power should vote for the amendmeat of the gentleman from Indiana. If the amendment was not adopted he should chim the privilege of calling the yeas and nays in committee, if anyone would second his views.

of Chester, thought the gentleman from Northampton was relation to the rule of the House on this subject, as it did not lling the yeas and nays in committee of the whole. He did and the rule.

of Northampton, had only referred to the celebrated Olm