Difference between revisions of ".MTczOA.MjAxNDc"
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
The committee to whom was referred the Preamble & Order moved yesterday by Mr Smith of Nobleboro' requesting the opinion of the Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court &c, reported that the same be indefinitely postponed - | The committee to whom was referred the Preamble & Order moved yesterday by Mr Smith of Nobleboro' requesting the opinion of the Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court &c, reported that the same be indefinitely postponed - | ||
| − | Before the question of acceptance was taken Mr Ruggles of Thomaston moved an amendment of the Order referred to said Committee as follows, " Fourth, can the members of the House and the members of the Senate, in convention, constitutionally designate who are the constitutional candidates to supply such deficiencies from the ordnance either of the Senate not accepted or agreed to by the Senate: or from any other evidence than a vote of the Senate declaring who are the Constitutional Candidates" | + | Before the question of acceptance was taken Mr Ruggles of Thomaston moved an amendment of the Order referred to said Committee as follows, " Fourth, can the members of the House and the members of the Senate, in convention, constitutionally designate who are the constitutional candidates to supply such deficiencies from the ordnance either of the Senate not accepted or agreed to by the Senate: or from any other evidence than a vote of the Senate declaring who are the Constitutional Candidates" |
| + | Mr Norton of Canaan, moved that the report, order an proposed amendment be laid upon the table - and the question was taken by yeas & nays and decided in the affirmative as follows yeas 75 nays 68 (see appendix page 315.) | ||
Revision as of 12:34, 3 September 2020
49
Tuesday February 2nd 1830
met according to adjournment.
The committee to whom was referred the Preamble & Order moved yesterday by Mr Smith of Nobleboro' requesting the opinion of the Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court &c, reported that the same be indefinitely postponed - Before the question of acceptance was taken Mr Ruggles of Thomaston moved an amendment of the Order referred to said Committee as follows, " Fourth, can the members of the House and the members of the Senate, in convention, constitutionally designate who are the constitutional candidates to supply such deficiencies from the ordnance either of the Senate not accepted or agreed to by the Senate: or from any other evidence than a vote of the Senate declaring who are the Constitutional Candidates" Mr Norton of Canaan, moved that the report, order an proposed amendment be laid upon the table - and the question was taken by yeas & nays and decided in the affirmative as follows yeas 75 nays 68 (see appendix page 315.)