bly be obtained, but he was unwilling to impose a duty on an officer which he could not discharge: he hoped the amendment would be agreed to. The amendment was then agreed to, ayes 61, noes 49.

Mr. STERIGERE, of Montgomery, moved to take the question on the resolutions separately.

Mr. STEVENS, of Adams, could not see how the Secretary of the Commonwealth could ascertain the official emoluments of the different officers. He thought it impossible for that officer to ascertain their official emoluments, although he might have in his possession the amount of their salaHe moved therefore to strike out the words "perquisites and official emoluments".

ries.

Mr. INGERSOLL said his very object was to ascertain what was paid to the various judicial officers of the Commonwealth, in addition to their salaries. In the laws of the last session of the Legislature he had discovered, much to his surprise, incorporated with an act relating to the administration of justice, and perhaps properly incorporated with it, that the Judges of the Supreme Court be allowed a compensation of four dollars a day while they were travelling. He desired then to know how much was received by each judicial officer, beyond the annual salary, so that when they come to act on the subject of the Judiciary, they might act understandingly. There might be other allowances to these officers besides that alluded to. There were also, for aught he knew, and he believed there were, other perquisites and emoluments allowed to the judicial officers, and he deemed it an important consideration that the Convention might be informed of the extent to which this system prevailed. The Aldermen of Philadelphia received certain emoluments, and he wished to be informed whether they received them in pursuance of any act of the Legislature. If the Secretary of the Commonwealth was not informed on this subject, he could say so, but if he was, Mr. I. would like to have the information from him. In short, his object was to arrive at an estimate of the amount of their emoluments, and every body must see that the language of the resolution was so couched as to leave the Secretary to answer as he might be informed. If he could not answer the call he might say so; but Mr. INGERSOLL was very sure that that officer, from the position in which he was placed, was better informed on this subject than perhaps any of the delegates to this Convention; and if it should appear that any of these officers received any thing but what was provided for by the act of Assembly, he was decidedly opposed to it. He desired that every cent received by these officers should be publicly known. His wish was that they might be fairly compensated, but he thought it entirely improper that the magistrate should be enabled to receive one cent which was not known to the community at large, and he had reason to believe that something of this kind did exist. He trusted therefore that, unless there could be some better reason adduced than that suggested by the gentleman from Adams (Mr. STEVENS,) the amendment might not prevail.

Mr. STEVENS withdrew his amendment, but suggested that the Secretary of the Commonwealth was not the proper officer to call upon for this information. It seemed to him that some officer connected with the Treasury, would be better able to answer the inquiry than the Secretary of the Commonwealth.

Mr. INGERSOLL then modified his resolution so as to insert after the words "Secretary of the Commonwealth", the words "and Auditor General".

Mr. MERRILL said the Auditor General would have the settling of all these accounts, and it seemed to him that the resolution was now in a shape to make it acceptable.

The first resolution was then agreed to.
The second resolution being read,

Mr. INGERSOLL modified it so as to read "

wealth, Auditor General", &c.

Secretary of the Common

Mr. MERRILL Would suggest whether the gentleman could not obtain his object better by allowing the subject to go to a committee of the Convention.

Mr. BROWN, of Philadelphia, asked whether it would not be the better course to make the inquiry of the Executive.

Mr. MERRILL then moved to strike out all after the word "State", with a view to send the remainder of the resolution to a committee.

Mr. INGERSOLL would very candidly state his object in offering this resolution. Before he left home he had been informed by a gentleman of the highest respectability, who took an interest in every thing of this kind that he had received a very able report from the Secretary of the Commonwealth on this subject. Since he had arrived in this place he had looked over this report and it appeared to be a very able paper. The Secretary appeared to be so much better informed on this subject than he was, that he supposed the better course would be to call upon him for this information, which he doubted not the Secretary was willing and even anxious to impart. He thought that by the Secretary's communicating the report he had made to the Legislature, and adding to it any information he might have received since, very important results might be derived from it. It was true that a committee of the Convention might do the same business by unofficially calling on the Secretary, but he had thought that officially calling upon him would give him an opportunity of doing what he was so well able and so well disposed to do, and would be a benefit to the community and tend to further the cause of education. If a majority of the Convention should think it better to refer the matter to a committee, so be it; he had no other object in view than the public good. Mr. MERRILL then withdrew his amendment, and the second resolution was agreed to.

The Convention then proceeded to the consideration of the report of the committee to draft rules for the government of the body.

The first four rules were adopted without amendment.

The fifth rule was read as follows:

"5. The President shall appoint the standing and select committees unless otherwise ordered by the Convention".

Mr. STERIGERE, of Montgomery, moved to strike from this rule the words "standing and", and add to the end thereof the words "and the standing committees shall be elected by a vote of the Convention".

Mr. MEREDITH, of Philadelphia, was sorry this motion was made by the gentleman in front of him from Montgomery. He was sorry the Convention should be now called upon to declare that their President was not

entitled to the same confidence, which was placed in the presiding officer of almost every other deliberative assembly in this country. Knowing, as he believed he knew, that this motion was not introduced in consequence of any personal feelings, he hoped it would be withdrawn, as he could not think but that it would lead to a debate and difficulty which ought not to be encouraged in this Convention. The committee which prepared these rules had taken for their guide those which had long been established and practised upon in the House of Representatives of the State, and he trusted that unless some good reason could be given, the amendment might not prevail.

Mr. BANKS, of Mifflin, thought we had better not introduce here, matters calculated to create excitement and discussion. He did not believe that the proposition was introduced for the purpose of creating any party feelings, but at the same time, it would tend to no good result, and he hoped the gentleman from the city, as well as the gentleman from Montgomery, would pursue such a course as would prevent an exciting party discussion and that we might be allowed to proceed with the business committed to our charge without delay.

Mr. MEREDITH explained that he had mentioned that this motion might appear to exhibit a want of confidence in the President of the Convention, but at the same time he said he did not believe that such distrust was personally felt by the members of the body.

Mr. BANKS was confident the gentleman who introduced this motion had no such feeling, nor was there any such feeling prevailing with the party to which he belonged. Those gentlemen were anxious to enter upon the duty committed to their charge in view of adopting such measures as might be submitted to the people, without any party feelings being connected with them. The gentleman from Montgomery believed the committees could be selected by the Convention quite as satisfactorily as in any other way. Other gentlemen thought the President should have the power of appointing them. Mr. BANKS said his own opinion was that the appointment of committees should be left with the presiding officer, unless that officer, by some act of his, should compromit the interests of the people, and, unless this should be the case, he was clearly of opinion that it was the duty of the Convention, to allow him those privileges granted to the presiding officer of almost every other deliberative body.

Mr. STERIGERE rose to disclaim the motive which gentlemen had supposed might be inferred from this motion. He had made the motion because he considered it a proper one, and the reasons given in relation to legislative bodies did not apply in this case. In the Senate of the United States, the committees were chosen by ballot; in the other House of Congress, the presiding officer appointed them. In this Convention, they had but very few committees to appoint, and certainly very few standing committees, so that the objection as to the loss of time could not apply in this case. If a political friend of his was occupying the chair he would make the same motion, and he made this remark to show that it was not out of any political feeling that he made the motion. He proposed confiding the selection of the standing committees to the Convention; and he did not think the presiding officer desired to have the selection left

with him. He did not believe that the presiding officer would regard this motion as personal to himself; it was not offered in that temper, so that the remark would not apply to him. He was disposed to be liberal in matters of this kind, but he thought the selection of the standing committees appropriately belonged to the Convention. Whatever decision, however, the Convention might come to, he would acquiesce in it.

Mr. CLARKE, of Indiana, apprehended the reason why the Senate of the United States elected their committees was, that they had nothing to say in the election of their presiding officer, therefore he might not have their confidence. But it appeared that this practice did not prevail in the House of Representatives of the United States, and in this state it did not prevail in either branch of the Legislature. Gentlemen here were accustomed to the rules which were practised upon in the Legislature, and he could see no necessity or propriety in changing from the old to a new mode. If they changed the existing practice in the Legislature they ought to have some good and substantial reason for it, and he felt free to admit that he could see no good reason for the change. He was perfectly satisfied with the rule as it was, and should vote against the amendment.

Mr. INGERSOLL, of Philadelphia, would vote against the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Montgomery, but for reasons entirely different from those of the gentleman who had just taken his seat; and averse as he was to troubling the Convention, he felt compelled to give the reasons why he should vote against this amendment.

Sir, said Mr. I. to me this is a question of feeling, of painful feeling, of excited feeling, of feelings under which I have been suffering ever since I took my seat in this Convention. I am not surprised at the motion, sir. I have regretted, deeply regretted, sir, and I believe all of us will regret to the last day we have to live, that it should be deemed necessary by any member of this body to take from its presiding officer the usual attributes and power of presiding officers of almost all legislative bodies, which, in the language of this rule, is the appointment of the standing and select committees. But, sir, is it to be wondered at that there should be a desire to take this power from you? Sir, I trust there are some here without any personal feelings, because I disclaim any; I am speaking impersonally; I trust there are here present some who do not deny that the chair of this Convention has been forced upon you by a party vote.Sir, I came here under very different impressions, and with very different hopes. Those illustrious men to whom you alluded on taking the chair, M'KEAN, and MIFFLIN, in our own state, MONROE, of Virginia, Adams, of Massachusetts, and MACON, of North Carolina, were selected to preside over the Conventions for altering the Constitutions of their different states, and, if I mistake not, in every instance, even in the most exciting periods of party organization, were allowed to take the chair without opposition. Sir, what friends it has been that forced upon you the necessity of taking that chair under the highest state of party discipline I ever saw in my life, I know not; I care not. I can only say for my own part that I would a thousand times rather trust you with the selection of the committees than the majority that put you there, because I flatter myself that, under your high responsibility and well known character as a gentleman, there will be a much better chance for the minority than from the majority in the Con

vention, from whom we in the minority have very little to expect. I have had some experience in these matters and have witnessed high party excitements, but in the course of my whole life I never saw so many schemes put in practice in order that the Secretaries, Door-keepers, and Assistants might all be of the right party. Sir, what will be said of us abroad; what will be said of us by that posterity to which you the other day alluded? I am a party man at all times and on all proper occasions, because I know of no other means in this supremely free country of sustaining what is right and of hindering what is wrong. I hope, however, that in this Convention we may act without regard to minor matters in politics. If there are any great principles which one party supports and another opposes, let us discuss the matter and see which party is in the right. But after the experience of the past week, which I say again has been a painful week to me, I do not wonder at the motion which has been made. I shall vote against it, however, in the first place, because it has been the constant practice for presiding officers to appoint committees in this state; but in the second place, I shall vote against it because I find here a state of organization that displayed itself on the first day of the meeting of the Convention, which makes me much better satisfied to trust the President than the majority of the Convention.

Mr. CHAMBERS, of Franklin, said that however great the responsibility to be imposed on the Chair by the rule under consideration, he apprehended there was no one more capable of meeting it than the Chair himself. He would beg leave to correct a remark of the gentleman from Philadelphia, (Mr. INGERSOLL): the Convention was not organised in the first instance by the selection of all the officers of the same party; and the party organization which was resorted to, was not altogether on one side of the house, for both parties participated in it. Whatever opinions we may entertain, said Mr. CHAMBERS, it is not for us to exculpate ourselves in this matter, as both parties are equally obnoxious to the charge made by the gentleman. If there was organization on the part of the majority, was it not to the same extent on the other side throughout the ballotings, and was not that honorable gentleman found in that organization on all Occasions? I do not think the proceedings of the week commend themelves so much to us as to make us desire to proceed to another election. We have seen hour after hour spent in efforts to elect officers of the Convention, and what might we expect if we were to proceed to an election of Committees. The Convention has spent nearly a week in the election of some four or five officers, and if it goes into an election of some nine or ten committees, of nine members each, there must evidently be a very great consumption of time; and if there is to be a consumption of time by the Convention, I hope it will be on graver matters than the election of standing committees. He should not have risen to make a single remark, but that he was a member of the committee which reported these rules to the Convention. As had been stated by his friend from Philadel phia, (Mr. MEREDITH) the committee were disposed to adhere to the rules of the House of Representatives as far as they were applicable. They were disposed to surrender their own opinions on many matters which they even considered exceptionable, because they were the rules practiced upon in the house, and were familiar to many members of this body.