SATURDAY, MAY 27, 1837.

Mr. RITER, of Philadelphia, presented a memorial of citizens of that county, praying the Convention to introduce into the fundamental law certain restrictions on the powers of banking corporations, &c., which was laid on the table.

Mr. SAEGER, of Crawford, submitted the following resolution, which was ordered to be laid on the table, and printed:

Resolved, That after the adoption of this Constitution, no bank or banks be chartered or re-charted, unless the Commonwealth holds or takes not more than one third nor less than one fifth of the capital stock thereof; nor shall any of said banks divide more than seven per cent. per annum of profits among its stockholders; one and an half per cent. for contingent fund, and the residue of dividend, if any over and above that as aforesaid, seventy-five per cent. thereof to be paid to the State Treasury and twenty-five per cent, in addition to stockholders; charters not to be for a longer term than twenty years, with such other privileges and restrictions as the Legislature may direct by law.

Mr. STEVENS, of Adams, from the special committee on secret societies and extra judicial oaths to whom was refered the memorial of the Demo'cratic Anti-Masonic Convention, reported the following new article, as an amendment to the Constitution; which was ordered to be laid on the table, and printed :

ᎪᎡᎢ.

No secret society using or administering unauthorized oaths or obligations, in the nature of oaths, and using secret signs, tokens or pass-words, and operating by affiliated branches or kindred societies, shall hereafter be formed within this Commonwealth, without express authority of law; and no person shall hereafter join or become a member of any such society, or take any such oath or obligation in the nature of an oath, in any such secret society now formed, or which may hereafter be formed. Mr. SCOTT, of Philadelphia, presented the following report of the minority of the same committee, which was ordered to be laid on the table, and printed:

Resolved, That it is not expedient to introduce into the Constitution any provision upon the subject refered to this committee.

JOHN M. SCOTT,

SAM'L C. BONHAM,
JOHN J. M'CAHEN.

Mr. DENNY, of Allegheny, from the committee on the first article of the Constitution, made the following report, which was ordered to be laid on the table, and printed:

Resolved, That the ninth section of said article be altered so as to read as follows:

ARTICLE IX. At the expiration of the term of any class of the present Senators, successors shall be elected for the term of three years. The Senators who may be elected in the year one thousend eight hundred and forty-one, shall be divided by lot into three classes. The seats of the Senators of the first class shall be vacated at the expiration of the first year, of the second class at the expiration of the second year, and of the third class at the expiration of the third year, so that hereafter one third may be chosen every year.

FIRST ARTICLE.

Mr. DENNY moved that the Convention resolve itself into commitee o

the whole on the first article of the Constitution. The motion, he considered, was now in order, as the committee had made a full report on that article.

Mr. PORTER, of Northampton, asked if it would not be in regular order to proceed on the business reported by the committee of the whole. The PRESIDENT replied that the gentleman from Northampton was right. That business would come up as the first order, after going through the morning orders, without any special motion. It might now be called up by motion, after the present motion should be disposed of.

Mr. DENNY, of Allegheny, thought that it was intended for the reports of the committee of the whole to remain unacted on in Convention, until the whole should have been gone through in committee, when all of them could be taken up together. The better way would be to have all before the Convention previous to any action upon them by that body. He had no objection to either course, as the Convention might decide.

The PRESIDENT stated that such disposition was merely a sort of general understanding in the Convention.

Mr. DICKEY, of Beaver, wished to know on which report of the committee it was proposed to go into committee of the whole. There arę three reports, besides a minority report, from the committee, before the Convention. He thought that the committee should have made a more formal report

Mr. DENNY replied that all the reports were on the files, except the one he had just made, which related merely to the classification of Senators. It could make no difference as to the progress, if the committee of the whole take up report number four for consideration, and having disposed of that, proceed to number five and then to number eleven, and so on. The whole subject would then be before the committee.

Mr. WHITE, of Tioga, expressed a wish that the consideration of this report might be defered for the present. He had a minority report from the committee, which he would have presented this morning, but for the absence of two gentlemen who had concured with him in it. He desired delay in order to enable the minority of the committee to make its report. He would ask the motion to be withdrawn, and the third article to be taken up.

The question was then put, and the motion was agreed to.

The Convention then resolved itself into committee of the whole, Mr. PORTER, of Northampton, in the chair.

The several reports of the committee were then read as follows:

MAY 12.

Mr. DENNY, from the committee on the first article of the Constitution, made report:

That they have had the same under consideration and beg leave to report as follows, viz:

That it is inexpedient to make any alteration in the first, third, fourth, eleventh, twelfth, thirteenth, fourteenth, fifteenth, sixteenth, seventeenth, eighteenth, nineteenth, twentieth, and twenty-first sections of said article. That the tenth section be so amended, as to read as follows:

"The General Assembly shall meet on the first Tuesday of January, in every year, unless sooner convened by the Governor”.

MAY 15.

The committee on the first article of the Constitution, further report that it is expedient to amend the second section of said article as follows: "SECT. 1. The representatives shall be chosen annually by the citizens of the city of Philadelphia, and of each county respectively, on the fourth Tuesday of October".

MAY 18.

Mr. DENNY, from the committee on the first article of the Constitution, made a report:

That the fifth section of said article be amended so as to read as follows, viz:

"SECT. 1. The Senators shall be chosen for three years by the citizens of Philadelphia, and of the several counties at the same time, in the same manner, and at the same places where they shall vote for Representatives".

"The committee further report that it is inexpedient to make any alteration in the sixth, seventh, eighth, twenty-second and twenty-third sections of said article".

MAY 12.

A

Mr. PURVIANCE, from the minority of the Committee on the first article of the Constitution, made a report:

That it is expedient to alter the 22d and 23d sections of said article to read as follows, viz:

"SECT. 22. Every bill which shall have passed both Houses shall be presented to the Governor: if he approve, he shall sign it; but if he shall not approve, he shall return it, with his objections, within ten days after it shall have been presented to him, and his objections shall be entered at large upon the journals of the House in which the bill originated; upon which being done, the Senate and House of Representatives shall, in secret meeting, proceed to reconsider the said bill, and if after such reconsideration, two thirds of said secret meeting, upon joint ballot, shall agree to pass the bill, it shall be a law. If any bill shall not be returned by the Governor within ten days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, it shall be a law, in like manner, as if he had signed it, unless the General Assembly by their adjournment prevent its return".

"SECT. 23. Every order, resolution, or vote, to which the concurence of both Houses may be necessary (except on a question of adjournment) shall be presented to the Governor, and before it shall take effect, be approved by him, or, being disapproved, shall be repassed by two thirds of both Houses on joint ballot, in secret meeting, for that purpose assembled".

MAY 20.

Mr. BARNITZ, from the minority of the committee to whom was refered the first article of the Constitution, made the following report:

The undersigned a minority of the committee to whom was refered the first article of the Constitution, submit the following report, viz :

"That it is inexpedient to make any alteration in the fifth section of the first article of the Constitution.

CHARLES A. BARNITZ,
HARMAR DENNY,
WM. P. MACLAY.

Mr. READ, of Susquehanna, moved that the committee rise, report progress, and ask leave to sit again. Enough had been done to shew the difficulty of acting on these reports as they have come from the committee. His object in moving that the committee rise was to obtain the recommitment of the reports to the committee, with instructions to make their report in an engrossed form. All the questions would then be before the Convention in a compact and convenient form. It was very awkward to have so many different reports from this committee. To have any consistent action, they must be all sent back to be reported in an engrossed form, including all those sections in which the committee had reported no alteration. Then every thing would be before the Convention in an intelligible form. There was business enough to be acted on to day, in the consideration of other articles. Or the order to take up the Judiciary article on Monday, might be discharged, and that question might be taken up to day. He hoped that the committee would rise, with the specific view of sending back their reports to the committee to be reported in an engrossed form.

Mr. DENNY, of Allegheny, said that the committee of the whole had already had the fourth article under consideration, and precisely in the same form; and it was agreed to report the first and third sections of the article without amendment, and the second section with an amendment. The committee thought that where no amendments were made, it was unnecessary to detail. There were several specific propositions in this report, number four, stating it to be inexpedient to make any alteration in certain sections. The committee might take up these, or the specific proposition to amend the fourth section, which was embraced in the same report. There was nothing to preclude the offering of amendments. The gentleman who had presented the report of the minority, could move his report in the form of an amendment, so as to have his views laid before the committee. The tendency of the present motion was only to prolong the business of the Convention, concerning which there were already complaints. To send back the reports to the committee could only be productive of delay. Every gentleman had the reports on his files, and could turn to them without difficulty, and if he had any amendment to offer, could propose it. The newspapers had already commenced attacks on the Convention for delaying the business, a course which was very improper. The Convention was the best judge of its own time and business, and he hoped, would take no advice on the subject, from that quarter at least.

Mr. READ, of Susquehanna, said he would not retard the taking of the

question one moment. He thought that by placing the propositions of the committee in an intelligible and a plain form, some difficulty would be saved, and such a discussion as took place yesterday avoided. All disputes would be prevented by reporting in an engrossed form. Instead of retarding the business, the effect would be to save time. It was true, the present forms of the reports did not absolutely preclude the offering of amendments, but the adoption of the other mode would greatly facilitate the business. He wished to save time, and to see the whole at one view.

Mr. CLARKE, of Indiana, expressed his hope that the committee would rise. The Convention had got into difficulty already, which he believed was in some measure imputable to him. He did not foresee the embarrassment which it would bring on the Convention, or he would have reported the fourth article in an engrossed form, copying from the Constitution so far as no alteration was recommended, and giving the sections the amended form where the committee had amended them. All this was soon done. The committee on the fourth article, reported, that the first and third sections did not need amendment. What then was before the committee of the whole? Not the first and third sections, but the report of the committee; and the only way to get an amendment in such case, was, where the committee had reported that there should be no amendment, to negative the report of the committee. The motion ought to be made general, so as to embrace all the committees, and he hoped it would prevail.

Mr. STERIGERE, of Montgomery, hoped to be pardoned for a word or two, as he belonged to the committee. He saw no sufficient reason for the committee rising, in order to send back these reports to the same committee. If it was intended to direct the committee to report more fully on the article, it might be done; but if it was merely for the purpose of reporting again on the same subject, he knew no good which could result when an article of the Constitution was taken up in committee of the whole; the question was on the article, not on the report of the committee; and the other day, when he said the question was on the report, he was answered that it was the article which was before the committee. Reports were nothing more than amendments, and were taken up in the same order as amendments offered by individual members, the only difference between them being that the one had the weight of a committee to back it, while the other was merely the suggestion of an individual; what object was to be gained by sending this report back to the same committee? If the committee wished to rise, in order to take up another article, it was very well, he had no objection; but he was not in favor of sending the report back to the committee which had made it. It would be an useless waste of time. He considered the rule to be that, when in committee of the whole, the article was under consideration, and the rule required that the report should be on the article itself.

Mr. MEREDITH, of Philadelphia, regretted that the motion had been made, unless it was made for the purpose of filling up a sort of a vacant day, when there was no special business for consideration. The views of the committee to which was refered this article, had been expressed, in the reports which are on the files of members. The committee had reported that certain sections of the first article required no amendment.