to enlighten the public mind on the subject, or give the printer a good job, was not for him to say. But we are told that the session before, there was an inquisition established by the Legislature. Well, if a committee of the Legislature, was to be called an inquisition, there was such an inquisition, but that inquisition did not cost the State as much as printing the testimony of the committee of the last session, and sending it all over the State. The Legislature of the session before last. to save expense, derlined the printing of the investigation of their committee. But what was that inquisition of which we have heard so much, and why was it instituted? It was a committee raised upon the petitions of a vast number of the freemen of this Commonwealth, to inquire into a conspiracy of ten thousand men, who were bound together by secret oaths and obligations-a conspiracy, too, which lay at the very root of all our free institutions: and when this committee was raised, the investigation instituted, and the parties to this conspiracy brought before it, instead of giving testimony, as they should have done, they hurled defiance in the teeth of the Legislature, the law. and the Constitution, and stood mute. They, instead of submiting to the laws of their country, when they were brought before the Legislature, refused to answer any question put to them, and thus defeated an investigation into a matter which eighty thousand of the freemen of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, had declared to be one of the most odious conspiracies which had ever been formed in our free and happy Government. Men who had been high in office, and had administered the laws, instead of obeying the laws submissively as it was their duty to do, violated them, and bid defiance to the clearly expressed will of the Legislature. In reply to the remark of a certain gentleman, that there were probably some things hid in the doings of that Legis ature, he had only to say, that he rared not what gen lemen thought about it. All upright and honorable men must look upon these low insinuations and suspicions, with scorn and contempt.

Mr. PORTER said, as the gentleman from Adams had heen pleased to speak with some severity, in relation to the conduct of the witnesses, who had been called before the committee of the Legislature before the last, and had spoken in his usual style, in relation to the Masonic society, he would take this occasion to say that he would meet the gentleman in a discussion of the subject of Masonry, and Anti-Masonry, whenever it came up; and he would now say that he stood pledged here to answer all the slanders which had been heaped on the institution of Masonry, whenever a proper occasion presented itself. Let this question come up when it would, he was ready to meet it, and he would be the last person who would back out from a full and fair discussion of the whole subject; but as it would be improper to enter into it at present, he would forbear until the appropriate time arrived for discussing it.

Mr. CHANDLER, of Philadelphia, said that the gentleman from Adams, (Mr. STEVENS) a gentleman with wl.cm he had had a personal intercourse for some time, which had afforded him a great deal of pleasure, had taken cccasion to make some remarks in relation to the witnesses who were brought before the Legislature, to be examined in relation to the alleged evils of Masonry, which were entirely uncalled for, The gentleman had said that those witnesses, instead of obeying the lawe of their country,

sentatives of the people, and stood mute. As one of those men who stood in this Hall, two years ago, a prisoner of the Commonwealth, he would not use the language which the gentleman from Adams had used, in reply to another gedtleman-he would not say it was false, but he would say, that neither he, (Mr. C.) nor any other member of that institution, who then stood here a prisoner, either hurled defiance in the face of the gentleman froin Adams, or the Representatives of the people. He treated the gentleman, and the Representatives of the people, with all proper respect. He bowed with deference to the Representatives of the people, standing only upon those rights which he held from the ALMIGHTY, and those rights he should defend while he was possessed of the power to defend them. He had bowed with deference to them, as he would now bow to all who held authority over him; but he must always defend his own personal rights, whether they were assailed by individuals, or by the high authority of the Legislative body. He did not now consider that he was called upon to defend an institution to which he was ardently attached, that was assailed; and he should therefore content himself by defending his own personal rights, as a member of that institution, and as a Representative of the city of Philadelphia, upon this floor.

Mr. DENNY thought it unnecessary to adjourn on the 18th of July. to meet again in October or December. He could see no good to result from this, and he apprehended there would be much inconvenience to the members of the body arising from it. It might, perhaps, not be attended with inconvenience to those who reside in this section of the State, but to those who lived in a remote part of the Commonwealth, it certainly would be very inconvenient, as it would be taking them from their homes much longer than by continuing in session until our labors were completed. Besides the difference in expense between adjourning now, to meet again, and continuing in session, would be very considerable. He had heard much said about the health of Harrisburg, but he saw no reason why we should complain of it. Certainly there had been less indisposition among the members of the Convention. than there was generally among the members of the Legislature, during the winter season. He was, therefore, for continuing our work now, so that we might complete it, and submit it to the vote of the people, at the October election, if practicable. If not then, at the earliest period thereafter possible. He could see no reason why we should now adjourn to meet again in the fall of the year. By so doing, the expenses of the Convention would be increased, and the people would become preju liced against the Convention, which might have a tendency to defeat judicious reform. Gentlemen have gone into calculations to show that the expenses of the Legislature, on certain occasions, were greater than this Convention. Now, it is well known, that the expenditures of the Legislature were made upon very peculiar occasions, and that the ordinary expenditure is much less, and was this to justify us in the eyes of the people in making these extravagant expenditures? Was it to be a sufficient justification to us. that another body had expended a larger sum of money than we have? Were we, because another body had done wrong, to follow its example, and do wrong also? Was this to be the course we were to pursue, and did gentlemen expect to justify themselves before the people, by making such references na these ? He hoped the question of

of it, and then he hoped we would go on with our business and get through in time to submit it to a vote of the people at the October elections, if practicable.

Mr. DUNLOP had listened for some time to the arguments of different gentlemen, in relation to the expenses of the Convention, and the efforts which had been made by different gentlemen, to show that the expenses of the Legislature were greater than the expenses of the Convention. Now, as he considered that this question of adjournment ought to be connected with the question of submiting to the people such amendments as we have made, and the further question whether we ought to return here to make other amendments, he considered this question of expense, as one of importance, and one which ought to be spoken of. It was certainly proper that the people should be informed of every thing which occured here, and also of the manner in which their money was expended, so that they might weigh the amendments we were m king, with the cost of them. İt was really amusing to see the different positions and grounds which gentlemen took in this Convention. The other day, when he made an esti mate of the expenses of the Convention, when the question of adjournment was before the House, he was told by one gentleman, that he was scaring the people, that the people would become alarmed at this array of expenses which was laid before them, yet now, this same gentleman tells us that the peop'e care nothing about the expenses of the Convention, that they are wholly indifferent as to what the expenditure may be, provided they carry the reforms which they have in view, and that they are determined on carrying these measures regardless of all expense. There was one thing, however, connected with this matter, which had struck him as a little singular, and that was, that these leaders in the Convention who had always cried out for reform, should be almost alarmed out of their wits, and scared from giving their votes in favor of an adjournment, by the exhibition of the expenses of the Convention, when the people cared so little about it. Gentlemen had said, that the speech he made the other day, prevented the day of adjournment being fixed at that time, and this seemed most surprising to him, when the same gentleman had told us that the people cared nothing at all about these expenses. He had not been the first person who introduced this subject of expenses here, as it had been introduced long before he had said any thing about it; but he was the first who had gone into a detail of the expenses of the body, and he had done this merely to show the people of the country what money was being expended here, so that they might compare the amendments made, with the expense of making them. If, however, some gentlemen had undertaken to show that the expenses of the Legislature were greater than the expenses of the Convention, it would become necessary for him to recapitulate some of his arguments, to satisfy the committee that what he then said was correct. He believed the expenses of the Convention to be greater, and considerably greater, than the expenses of the ordinary Legislature.The expenses of the ordinary Legislature were about the same as that of the Convention, with the exception of the Stenographers and the printing. There are the same number of members of the Convention, as of the Legislature, at the same pay, and there are about the same number of officers employed by the Convention, as in the ordinary Legislature, at about the

Journal about twelve hundred copies, and half that number of the German. Now, if gentlemen would turn to page one hundred and fifteen of the minutes of the Convention, they would find that the printer of the English Journal was directed to print twelve hundred and fifty copies of said Journal, together with the minutes of the committee of the whole, and the printer of the German Journal was directed to print the same number.— Now, it will be recollected that in the Legislature, there is no Journal kept of the proceedings in committee of the whole, which is done here, and this toge her with the extra number of copies, would balance the printing of the Journal of the Senate. Then there was nothing remaining to be balanced but the bills. and he apprehended that the printing of our Journal of debates would cost a vastly greater sum than the bil's. Every gentleman who would examine the matter, and knew any thing of the expenses of printing, must know that the expense of printing the debates of the Convention, would far exceed the printing of the bills of the Legislature. He believed that the printing of the debates would quadruple the expense of printing the bills. He thought he had shown that the expenses of printing of the Convention, were greater than that of the Legislature, and there were to be added to this, the salaries of the Stenographers, and the expense of the Daily Chronicle, together with the additional postage, which would bring the expenses of the Convention up to a considerable sum above the expenses of the ordinary Legislature. Those gentlemen who had said that the expenses of the ordinary Legislature were greater than those of the Convention had made the assertion without the proper examination, and he now took upon himself to say, that any gentleman who would examine the facts, would find that our expenses were very considerably greater than the expenses of the ordinary Legislature. He considered it right and proper that this question should be agitated, because he wished to see the question of adjournment coupled with the question of submiting those amendments which we have made to the people, and with the question whether the people desire this Convention to re-assemble to propose further amendments to the Constitution. Then, if the people thought the amend ments desired were paramount to the cost which it would put them to, to obtain them they can declare that the Convention shall re-assemble, and proceed with the amendments which they desire, and if they think they will cost more than they are worth, they can so decide, and the Convention will be adjourned sine die.

The question was then taken on the amendment, and it was decided in the affirmative-Year 58-Nays 51, as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Barciay, Barnitz, Bedford, Biddle, Brown of Northampton, Carey, Cham ers, Chandler of Chester, Chan ller of Philadelphia, Chauncey, Cleavinger, Craig, Cium, Cummin, Curll, Darlington, Dillinger, Farrelly, Forward, Fry, Ful er, Gearhart, Gienell, Harris, Hastings, Hopkinson, Houpt, Hyde, Ingersoll, Jenks, Kennedy, Krebs, Maclay, Mann, Martin, M'Cahen, Merrill, Montgomery, Myers, Overfield, Pennypacker, Po lock, Porter of Lancaster, Porter of Northampton, Reigart, R ter. Russell, Sau er, Scott, Selers, Serrill, Scheez, Saellito, Sill, Shively, Swetland, Todd, Widmin, Sergeant, Fresident-58.

NAYS-Messes. Agnew, Ayres, Baldwin, Banks, Barndollar, Bayne, Bell, Bonham, But er, Clarke of Beaver, C.ark of Dauphin, Clarke of Ind ana, Clin', Cochran, Cope, Crain, Cunningham, Darah, Denny, Dicke.son, Donnell. Doran, Dunlop. Eule, Fleming, Gamble, Gilmore, Hayhurst, Helffenstein, Hiester, High, Keim, Kerr, Konigmacher, M'Call, M'sherry, Mored th, Merkel, Miller, Nevin, Purviance, Read, Ritter, Rogers,

Mr. HEISTER then called for the yeas and nays on the amendment, as amended, which were ordered.

Mr. EARLE then moved to amend the amendment by adding thereto the following proviso:

"Provided, That before such adjournment, the tenure of the Judges of the several courts, and a provision for future amendments, shall be considered in committee of the whole."

Mr EARLE called for the yeas and nays which were ordered, and were Yeas 41-Nays 69, as follows:

YEAS-Messr. Agnew, Ayres, Banks, Barnitz, Bayne, Bedford, Bonham, Drown, of Lancaster, Brown, of Philadelphia. Butler, Chambers, Clarke, of Beaver. Clark, of Dauphin, Clarke, of In lians, Cline, Cochran, Crain, Darrah, Denny, Earle, Flemig, Gamble, Hayhurst, Helffenstein, Hiester, High, Ingersoll, Keim, Kerr, M'Cahen. Me kel, Miller. Montgomery, Nevin, Purviance, Read, Ritter, Rog rs, Shellito, Smyth, Sterige, Stickel, Taggart-41.

NAYS-Messrs Baldwin, Barclay, Barndollar, Bell. Bidille, Carey, Chandler, of Chester, Chandler, of Philadelphia, Chauncey, Cleavinger, Cope, Craig, Crum, Cummin, Cunningham, Curll, Darlington, Dickerson, Dilinger, Donnell, Dunlop, Farrelly, Forward, Fry, Fuller, Gearhart, G Imore, Grenell, Harris, Hastings, Hopki son, Houpt, Hyde, Jenks, Kennedy, Konigmacher, Krebs, Maclay, Mann, Martin, M'Call, M'Sherry, Meredith, Merrill. Myers, Overfield, Pennypacker, Pollock. Porter of Lancaster, Porter, of North mp ton, Reigart, Riter, Russell. Sarger, cott Sellers, Serrill, Scheetz, Sill, Snively, Stevens, Swetland, Thomas, Todd, Weidman, Young, Sergeant. President-69. So the amendment to the amendment, was decided in the negative. M. STEVENS then moved to amend the amendment, by substituting the following:

Resolved. That the following amendments to the Constitution, shall be submited to the people of this Commonwealth for their confi mation or rejection, at the next general election, in the following manner: The amendments shall be submited all together. The several inspect r appointed or chosen to conduct the next general election, shall. at the times and places of holding said election, receive written or printed tickets from the electors qualified to vote at said election, labelled on the outside "Amendments," and containing on the inside," For the amendments." or " Against the amendments," and the votes thus given, shall be counted and returned in the same manner as is now provided for in the case of votes for Representatives-which sail votes shall be opened, counted, and declared by the next General Assembly, in joint Convention on the third Wednes day of December next: And if a majority of all the vote thus given, shall be "For the amendments." then these amendments shall become and be a part of the Constitution of this Commonwealth; otherwise they shall be void. The Secretary of the Commnonwealth, shall cause the amendments to be published in at least two newspapers in each county (containing so many) for at least two months before the election.

AMENDMENTS.

ARTICLE I. Alter the sections second and tenth, so as to read as follows: SECTION 2. The Repre entatives shall be chosen annually, by the citizens of Philadelphia and of each county, respective y, on the third Tuesday of O tober.

SECT. 10. The General As embly shall meet on the first Tuesday of January in each year, unless sooner convened by the Governor.

ART. II, OF THE CONSTITUTION. Alter section first, so as to read as follows: SECT. 1. In elections by the citizens, every freeman of the age of twenty-one years, having resided in the State one year, or it he had previously been a qualified elec tor, six months before the election, ani within two yea s next before the election paid a state or county tax, which shall have be n assessed at least ten days next before the election, shal enjoy the rights of an elector: Provided, That freemen, citizens of the United States, having resided in the State as aforesaid, being between the ages of twenty-one and twenty-two years, shall be entitled to vote, although they shall not have paid