had made. Situated as were now, we were cut off from the people, and could not learn their opinions as to what we should do. He trusted then, under all the circumstances of the case, that the amendment would prevail. And unless it did, he would feel constrained to vote against the adjournment altogether. It was the only consideration which could reconcile his mind to an adjournment at all. And, in saying this, it should be understood, that he had interests at home which much required his presence, and the fears which he entertained, in regard to his health, were as great as those of any other gentleman on this floor. We were all here on duty of the highest importance, and he, for one, was unwilling to abandon it so long as he retained sufficient health and strength to remain here. He was unwilling to leave his labor, until we had arrived at something like a termination. He would agree to adjourn temporarily after we had gone through committee of the whole; but, he did object to do so before. If they were to do so, what a spectacle would be presented to the people! The people had sent us here, after a hard struggle of many years, and upon mature reflection, that alterations in our Constitution were necessary. And, should we adjourn, without being able to tell them that we had made any real progress in our duties, after consuming their time and their money, and without having given a single indication as to what the final result of the deliberations of the Convention would be? He would say, that the people ought to have been informed before now, what we intended doing in regard to the power of the Legislature, over corporations and the Governor's patronage, and many other subjects- Was it proper, he would ask, that we should return to our constituents, without having expressed a single united opinion on any one of those great subjects, which induced them to incur all this expense? It seemed to him to be altogether unreasonable, to be asking too much of the patience of the people. He knew that they possessed great patience, for they had endured the evils of the Constitution for nearly half a century. They had endured with great patience the long, and in many instances, useless speeches which had been delivered on this floor, and he believed that they were prepared to have their patience still further taxed. But, he declared that he was not disposed to insult them, or to give them back their Constitution as we received it from them. He was not for going home without lifting his finger against any attempt to adjourn under existing circumstances. Let gentlemen, then, if it were necessary for their health—if it were necessary in reference to the business of the Convention-if it were necessary that we should have a recss-resolve that they would express their sentiments, on some, at least, of the important questions before the Convention, and tell the public what they had done, which was nothing more than they had a right to demand of us. He would repeat, that unless this course of proceeding was adopted, he would vote against every motion for an adjournment. He hoped that the gentleman from Lancaster would withdraw his amendment, and allow the resolution of the gentleman

from Montgomery to be voted upon. He trusted that it would be negatived, and that we should remain here until we had performed the duty which we were sent here to do. He asked for the yeas and nays.

Mr. Cox, of Somerset, said, we could not tell when we would adjourn, if we intended to sit until we got through committee of the whole. We could not tell whether that would be the 20th of July, or the 20th of

sing a resolution to adjourn when we get through committee of the whole. Why not stop till we get through. It was best to fix no day at present, for there was not a member of the Convention who would undertake to say that we could get through by the 7th of July. He hoped that the. resolution, together with the amendment of the gentleman from Luzerne, would be negatived.

Mr. JENKS, of Bucks, was satisfied that the day was not distant, when this body would see the necessity and propriety of adjourning. He anticipated that if the question was taken now, not only on the amendment of the gentleman from Luzerne, but also on the resolution as offered by the gentleman from Montgomery, they would be negatived. And, being anxious to avoid that issue, he would move to postpone the amendment, together with the resolution, until Monday week.

Mr. MARTIN, of Philadelphia, said, that it had been his intention to have offered a few remarks before the motion to postpone was made. He would now, however, merely say, that he would vote against postponing. And, if that motion should fail, he would then vote against any resolution for fixing a day of adjournment. Nearly the whole of the forenoon had been spent in discussing this question, and we might as well, at once, agree to adjourn on the 7th of July, to meet again on the 27th of the same month. If, then, the motion to postpone should not prevail, and the resolution should come up again, he would offer a resolution that the Convention shall adjourn on the 7th of July, and meet agam on the 27th.— This would afford gentlemen an opportunity to attend to their harvest. This was a matter which deserved the attention of the Convention. It would be impossible to keep gentlemen in their seats here during harvest, and we might as well meet the question now. He was, therefore, opposed to the postponement of the subject. No reasonable objections have been urged to a temporary adjournment. He did not know why gentlemen were so anxious to give the Convention a bad character. We have been deeply, closely, laboriously employed for a long time, and he had heard no complaints of the conduct of the Convention, except from gentlemen themselves. He would ask gentlemen to contemplate the consequences of holding ourselves up in the light of an idle and careless body, neglectful of our duties and careless of the public interests. It would only tend to create prejudice against our ultimate action, and to prevent any beneficial results a from it. He did not dread any manifestation of public displeasure from our adjourning for a week or two; but, he was opposed to adjourning for such a length of time, as would remove the subjects of our deliberation from our view. By a short recess, we should not lose sight of what we had done, and should come back after it, with renewed vigor to complete the work. There was no ground for any of the reproaches about the tardiness of the movements of the Convention. We came here to consult and deliberate, and not to act hastily. We might, if we had wished to drive the business, have gone into committee of the whole on the Constitution, on the first day we came here, agreed upon our amendments, reported, and concured in them, and adjourned the evening of the same day. Or, if despatch was the only object, why could we not pass a Constitution now, and adjourn sine die, immediately after.

Mr. SHELLITO was sorry, he said, when he heard that the question of

whole morning. He was very sorry that these motions for adjournment prevented us from getting more than four or five days in the week for attention to our business. If any here were so anxious to go to their harvests, as had been represented, let them go, with leave or without leave, and be answerable for it to their constituents. He was anxious to despatch the business, and was willing to stay here till that was done, even if he laid his bones here.

Mr. WOODWARD modified his motion to amend so as to insert, after the word "adjourn", the following, viz: "so soon as the several articles of the Constitution shall have passed through committee of the whole".

Mr. SAEGER opposed the amendment, and also an adjournment of any sort, until the Convention finished the business they came to do. He said, that the idea of adjourning to accommodate the farmers, suggested to him the fact, that some gentlemen wished to pick chestnuts out of the hot coals, but did not wish to use their own fingers. They wished to adjourn, and wished to lay it to the farmers. The farmers were willing to stay and do the work which the people sent them to do.

Mr. BAYNE demanded the previous question, and it was called for by eighteen delegates, as follows: Messrs. BAYNE, HENDERSON, of Dauphin, DICKEY, MAnn, Cox, SELLERS, SAEGER, FARRELLY, HYDE, SMYTH, MAGEE, DONAGAN, SMITH, CURLL, BIGELOW, CLARKE, of Beaver, TODD, and CRUM.

The question being, shall the main question be now put,

Mr. WOODWARD asked the yeas and nays, and they were ordered, and were as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Agnew, Ayres, Banks, Barndollar, Barnitz, Bayne, Bigelow, Brown of Lancaster, Brown, of Northampton, Butler, Chambers, Chauncey, Clapp, Clarke, of Beaver, Clark, of Dauphin, Cleavinger, Cline, Coates, Cochran, Cope, Craig, Crum, Cummin, Cunningham, Curll, Dickey, Farrelly, Fuller, Gamble, Gearhart, Gilmore, Grenell, Hastings, Hayhurst, Helffenstein, Henderson, of Allegheny, Henderson, of Dauphin, Hiester, Houpt, Hyde, Kennedy, Kerr, Long, Lyons, Maclay, Mann, M'Call, Merkel, Miller, Montgomery, Overfield, Pollock, Porter, of Lancaster, Reigart, Ritter, Rogers, Royer, Russel, Saeger, Sellers, Seltzer, Smith, Smyth, Snively, Sterigere, Thomas, Todd, Weaver, White, Sergeant, President-70.

NAYS-Messrs. Bedford, Bell, Biddle, Brown, of Philadelphia, Chandler, of Chester, Clarke, of Indiana, Cox, Crain, Darlington, Darrah, Denny, Dickerson, Dillinger, Dona gan, Doran, Earle, Fleming, Forward, Foulkrod, Fry, Hopkinson, Jenks, Konigmacher, Magee, Martin, M'Cahen, M'Dowell, M'Sherry, Merrill, Myers, Porter, of Northampton, Purviance, Read, Scott, Scheetz, Shellito, Swetland, Taggart, Woodward, Young-40. So the main question was ordered to be put.

The question being then taken on the original resolution, as moved by Mr, MANN,

The yeas and nays were required by Mr. HIESTER, and Mr, REIGArt, and were as follows, viz:

YEAS-Messrs. Bigelow, Brown, of Lancaster, Brown, of Northampton, Chandler, of Chester, Chauncey, Clepp, Cleavinger, Coates, Cope, Craig, Crum, Cunningham, Curll, Forward, Foulkrod, Grenell, Hastings, Houpt, Hyde, Jenks, Kennedy, Long, Lyons, Maclay, Mann, M'Call, Miller, Overfield, Porter, of Lancaster, Porter, of Northampton, Reigart, Royer, Russell, Scott, Sellers, Snively, Swetland-37.

NAYS-Messrs. Agnew, Ayres, Banks, Barndollar, Bayne, Bedford, Bell, Biddle, Brown, of Philadelphia, Butler, Chambers, Clarke, of Beaver, Clark, of Dauphin, Clarke, of Indiana, Cline, Cochran, Cox, Crain, Cummin, Darlington, Darrah, Denny, Dickey, Dickerson, Dillinger, Donagan, Doran, Earle, Farrelly, Fleming, Fry, Fuller, Gamble,

son, Kerr, Konigmacher, Magee, Martin. M'Cahen, M'Dowell, M'Sherry, Merrill, Merkel, Montgomery, Myers, Pollock, Purviance, Read, Ritter, Rogers, Saeger, Seltzer, Scheetz, Shellito, Smyth, Sterigere, Taggart, Thomas, Todd, Weaver, White, Woodward, Young, Sergeant, President-70.

So the question was determined in the negative.

Mr. CLAPP obtained leave of absence for a few days, from Monday

next.

Mr. BELL offered the following resolution, which was read:

Resolved, That this Convention will adjourn, as soon as the several articles of the Constitntion shall have ben passed through committee of the whole, to meet again, at this place, on the 17th of October next.

Mr. BELL called for the second reading and consideration of the resolution, which was agreed to-ayes, 46; nays, 45.

Mr. B. said, it seemed to be considered that, after the amendments were passed through the committee of the whole, the Convention should adjourn. He had submited the resolution for the purpose of testing the sense of the Convention on that subject. If it was the determination of the Convention not to adjourn at all, until they had gone through with their business, it ought to be known. He asked the yeas and nays on the resolution.

Mr. DICKEY hoped, he said, the gentleman would not press this subject now. Let us go on with our business, and make what progress we can. He hoped we should get through the committee of the whole before we took up this question. After the vote just taken, he hoped the subject would not be urged again.

Mr. BELL said, he voted against the adjournment on a particular day, but he wished the Convention to say, whether they intended to adjourn when they had got through the committee of the whole, or not. The vote just taken did not decide this question.

Mr. MERRILL said, if any one would tell us when we would get through the committee of the whole, he would be willing to vote upon the resolution. We might get through sooner than we expected, or perhaps it would take us longer. He wished to continue the session, until it was ascertained whether it would be practicable to finish the work or not.

Mr. DARLINGTON did not think it necessary to decide this question

now.

Mr. FORWARD hoped, he said, it would be decided. After wading through the summer here, or nearly through, he hoped we should not adjourn to come back again in two months. He hoped the Convention would reject the resolution, so as to settle the question.

Mr. STERIGERE moved to amend the resolution, by striking out all after the word "resolved", and providing that the Convention, when it adjourns, adjourn to meet at 4 o'clock this afternoon.

Mr. DICKEY moved to postpone the resolution and amendment indefinitely agreed to, 52 to 41.

MONDAY, JUNE 26, 1837.

THIRD ARTICLE.

The Convention again resolved itself into committee of the whole, on the third article of the Constitution, Mr. KERR, of Washington, in the Chair.

The question pending being on the motion of Mr. HAYHURST, to amend the amendment, by inserting after the word "taxes", and before the word " but", the words following, viz: "And free male citizens, qualified by age and residence as aforesaid, who shall, within two years next before the election, have paid any public tax required by law, shall also be entitled to vote in the district in which they shall reside".

Mr. WOODWARD, of Luzerne, rose to make one or two suggestions.It appeared to him to be the object of the mover of this amendment, to introduce some mode of identifying voters as residents of the district. He (Mr. W.) would prefer the adoption of any other mode to that of paying a tax. If it was the desire of the committee to establish a mode of designating a species of record, to establish the fact of residence, it ought to be made on the most liberal principle. IIe did not believe, that a majority of this Convention were prepared to say that property is to be a basis of the right of suffrage, even to a limited extent, or that a tax qualification should be retained for any other purpose than as a record of citizenship. Gentlemen in favor of this principle, wish to make it rest on a certain length of residence. In this view, the mode of ascertaining the tax, in this amendment, is not so objectionable. In this view, it is more tolerable than when imposed under the idea that it confers any particular privilege. If a tax qualification be established for this purpose, it ought to embrace every man who pays any species of tax. A borough tax, for such purpose, would be as good evidence as a county tax; and, he who contributes by his labor, on the highways and public roads, should be equally entitled, because, owing to the great intercourse, he who pays the tax in this land of labor, stands in as much estimation, in public opinion, as he who pays a State or county tax of a shilling. Has he not as complete and full evidence of his right to vote, as if he paid a State tax? The object of the amendment is to extend the right, so as to allow him, who pays a township or borough tax, as well as him who pays a public and State tax, to exercise the right which is his, and this is sufficient evidence of the fact. He was in favor of this amendment. It extended the privilege to the honest laborer who may not have been able to save a sufficient sum to pay the State tax. There were many honest laborers, within his knowledge, who were not able to retain, from the necessary expenses of their families, the contingencies of sickness, and other incidents, enough to pay the State tax, but had contributed, by their working on the roads, and thus acquired a meritorious right to the exercise of the elective franchise. Might not this then be as satisfactory evidence as if they had been able to meet the hard faced collector. The man who has earned the right by the toil of his hands, as well as he who contributes his mite to the county tax, should be entitled to vote. And, who would object to this