Mr. KING, of Missouri, claimed the floor, and the Florida proceedings were not read. Mr. King then addressed the Convention in opposition to the second amendment.

Mr. WEST, of Connecticut, addressed the Convention in opposition to the amendment of Mr. Gilmore.

Mr. HUNTER, of Missouri, addressed the Convention in favor of the Gilmore amendment.

Mr. AVERY, of North Carolina, addressed the Convention in favor of the Gilmore amendment.

Mr. ATKINS, of Tennessee, addressed the Convention at some length, and then moved the previous question.

Mr. MOFFATT, of Virginia, moved that the Convention do now adjourn, which motion was not agreed to.

The vote seconding the demand for the previous question was then put, and a vote by States was demanded, and the demand for the previous question was recorded by the following vote, viz: yeas 233, nays 18.

The question was then announced to be on ordering the previous question to be put, when,

On motion of Mr. RICHARDSON, of Illinois, the Convention adjourned.

SECOND DAY.

TUESDAY, JUNE 19, 1860.

The Convention was called to order at 10% o'clock A. M., by the President, Hon. CALEB CUSHING.

Prayer was offered by the Rev. Dr. FULLER, of Baltimore.

On motion of Mr. LUDLOW, of New York, the reading of the Journal of Monday was dispensed with.

The PRESIDENT stated the question to be upon ordering the main question to be put, the demand for the previous question having been seconded yesterday upon the amendment of Mr. Gilmore, of Pennsylvania, to the amendment of Mr. Church, of New York, to the resolution of Mr. Howard, of Ten

nessee.

Mr. CHURCH, of New York. I desire to ask the unanimous consent for the purpose of submitting a proposition calculated to harmonize all the questions now pending before the Convention. (Cries of " hear," "hear.")

Upon a consultation with the gentleman who moves an amendment to my amendment (Mr Gilmore, of Pennsylvania), he has agreed, if it meets with the approbation of this Convention, for the purpose of harmonizing the action of this Convention, to an arrangement alike honorable to both sides, and which, if carried out, will terminate the controversy as to all pending questions. The proposition which has been made and accepted is simply this: The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Gilmore), is to withdraw his amendment to my amendment, and then I am to withdraw the latter part of my resolution, leaving only a simple resolution of reference to the Committee on Credentials. I will now ask the unanimous consent of the Convention for the purpose of carrying out that understanding,

The PRESIDENT. The Chair will suggest to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Church), and to the Convention, that, as there has been a second to the demand for the previous question, the object which he proposes can only be reached either by putting the vote upon the main question and rejecting it, or by the unanimous consent of the Convention.

No objection being heard, unanimous consent was granted.

Mr. GILMORE, of Pennsylvania. For the purpose of carrying out the arrangement that has just been announced, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment to the amendment of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Church). The amendment of Mr. Gilmore was as follows:

Resolved, That the President of the Convention be directed to issue tick ets of admission to seats in the Convention to the delegates from the States of Texas, Florida, Mississippi and Arkansas, in which States there are no contesting delegations.

The amendment to the amendment was accordingly withdrawn.

Mr. CHURCH, of New York. For the purpose of perfecting the arrangement, I will now modify my resolution by striking out the latter part of it, leaving it simply a resolution of reference to the Committee on Credentials.

The reading of the original resolution of Mr. Howard, of Tennessee, together with the amendment of Mr. Church, of New York, as proposed yesterday, was called for, and they were read as follows:

Mr. HOWARD's original resolution:

Resolved, That the President of this Convention direct the Sergeant-atArms to issue tickets of admission to the delegates of the Convention as originally constituted and organized at Charleston.

Mr. CHURCH's amendment:

Resolved, That the credentials of all persons claiming seats in this Convention made vacant by the secession of delegates at Charleston, be referred to the Committee on Credentials; and said Committee is hereby instructed, as soon as practicable, to examine the same, and report the names of persons entitled to such seats, with the distinct understanding, however, that every person accepting a seat in this Convention is bound in honor and good faith to abide by the action of this Convention and support its nominees.

The amendment, as modified by Mr. Church, was then read as follows: Resolved, That the credentials of all persons claiming seats in this Convention made vacant by the secession of delegates at Charleston, be referred to the Committee on Credentials, and said Committee is hereby instructed, as soon as practicable, to examine the same and report the names of persons entitled to such seats.

The PRESIDENT. The next question is, Shall the main question now be put upon the modified amendment which occupies the place of the original before the modification was made.

The question being taken, the main question was unanimously ordered. The question recurred upon the amendment of Mr. Church, of New York, as modified.

Mr. WARD, of Ohio. I desire, before the question is put, to inquire what the exact question is? I desire now to know whether that is a substitute for the original proposition, or merely an addition by way of amendment to it.

The PRESIDENT. The Chair will state that he understands the question to be upon the substitution of the proposition of the gentleman from New York, for the original proposition of the gentleman from Tennessee.

The question being then taken on the amendment of Mr. Church, of New York, was agreed to, and the resolution of Mr. Howard, of Tennessee, as amended, was adopted.

Mr. COCHRAN, of New York, made a motion to reconsider the last vote and to lay the motion to reconsider on the table, which was agreed to. Mr McCook, of Ohio, moved that the Convention do now adjourn. Mr. HALLETT, of Massachusetts, rose to a question of privilege.

Mr. STUART, of Michigan. There can be no higher question of privilege than that of adjournment.

The PRESIDENT. The gentleman is right, but the Chair suggests that he

understands the explanation of the gentleman from Massachusetts to relate to a cortested seat in that delegation.

Mr. BRODHEAD moved to amend the motion to adjourn by inserting "to 5 o'clock this afternoon,"

The PRESIDENT. The motion to adjourn is not amendable.

Mr. PHILLIPS, of Pennsylvania. I move that when this Convention adjourn to-day it be to meet at 5 o'clock this afternoon.

The PRESIDENT. The Chair is of opinion that that motion is in order. Mr. STUART. I beg leave to suggest that that motion cannot be in order. Mr. MONTGOMERY, of Pennsylvania. I would state to the Convention that the delegation from Massachusetts desire, before the House adjourns, to submit a proposition. There is a contested seat in that delegation, and it may as well be disposed of at once. I would suggest to my colleague (Mr. Phillips) that he withdraw his motion.

Mr. PHILLIPS. The motion I made does not interfere with anything the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr Hallett) may desire to present. I would also state that it is, I believe, the universal practice to allow the House, by its vote, to fix the time to which it will adjourn before it does adjourn. That certainly must be so, for unless that vote is taken before adjournment it never can be taken.

Mr. McCook, of Ohio, withdrew his motion to adjourn.

Mr. PHILLIPS, of Pennsylvania, then moved that when this Convention adjourn it be to meet at 5 o'clock this afternoon.

Mr. STURMAN, of Arkansas, asked the gentleman to withdraw his motion to allow him to present to the Convention a statement from his colleague. This morning he had the protest of the contesting delegates from Arkansas handed to him, with a polite request to present it to the Convention. He would send it to the Chair and request that it be read.

Mr. HALLETT, of Massachusetts, obtained the floor.

Mr. STUART, of Michigan, desired to submit some remarks upon the motion of the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

The PRESIDENT stated that the Chair would receive the document from the gentleman from Arkansas, but at present he could not entertain any new proposition pending the motion to adjourn.

A DELEGATE from New York inquired if it would be in order to refer the paper to the Committee on Credentials?

The CHAIR. Not pending the present motion to fix the hour to which the Convention will adjourn.

Mr. STUART. On that motion I claim the floor.

The PRESIDENT. The House having given its unanimous assent to the gentleman from Arkansas to present this paper, it will now be read.

Mr. STUART. The consent of the Convention was not given.

Mr. COCHRAN moved that the paper, without reading, be referred to the Committee on Credentials.

The PRESIDENT. That is not in order. It can be read by unanimous consent, not otherwise.

Many Delegates objected.

The PRESIDENT. The question then is on the motion to adjourn till 5 o'clock. Mr. PHILLIPS, of Pennsylvania, read from the rules of the House of Repre sentatives, to show that the motion to adjourn was always in order, and that the motion to fix a day to which the House will adjourn takes precedence of any other, and that both these mo ions, together with the motion to lay on the table, must be decided without debate.

The PRESIDENT suggested that that might not apply to fixing an hour to which to adjourn.

Mr. PHILLIPS believed that it did.

Mr. STUART said the rule applied to fixing a day, and had no application to this case. It was always in order to proceed to show that the hour designated was an impracticable one.

Mr. COCHRAN, of New York, suggested that the rules of the House of Representatives were applicable to this body as far as they were practicable. The House sat for months, this Convention for days. Hours of a day were to this Convention as days were to the sessions of the House. Mr. STUART moved to lay the motion on the table. The PRESIDENT said that that motion was not in order.

Mr. CоCHRAN The motion to fix a time is a privileged motion, the same as the motion to lay on the table.

Mr. STUART. It would be strange if we could not get rid of a subject. Mr. HALLETT, of Massachusetts, desired to submit a matter to the Conven. tion in reference to a contested seat in Massachusetts. His alternate at Charleston claimed to retain his seat in this Convention. He desired to have a hearing before the Committee on Credentials upon that question, and would submit the question whenever it was in order, or now, by general consent.

Mr. CLARK and Mr. CLAIBORNE, of Missouri, stated that a similar case had occurred in the Missouri delegation.

Mr. BRIGGS, of New York, inquired whether, under the resolution adopted this morning, all these cases did not go necessarily to the Committee?

The SECRETARY read the resolution of the gentleman from New York, from which it appears that only credentials from seceding States went to the Committee.

Mr. STUART suggested that unanimous consent be given to have all such cases referred to the Committee.

No objection being made, the order was made.

The PRESIDENT here announced that Mr. Stout, of Oregon, Mr. Whitely, of Delaware, Mr. Wood, of Kentucky, and Mr. Gregory, of California, desired to be excused from serving on the Committee on Credentials.

By unanimous consent of the Convention, the following delegates were substituted in their place: Mr. Stevens, of Oregon; Mr. Buley, of Delaware; Mr. Morrow, of Kentucky; and Mr Dudley, of California.

The COMMITTEE ON CREDENTIALS now stands as follows:

Arkansas, Van. H. Manning; Connecticut, James Gallagher; California, John S. Dudley, Delaware, John H. Buley: Indiana, S. A. Hall; Illinois, Willlam J. Allen; lowa, D. G Finch; Kentucky. G. H. Morrow; Maine, Charles D. Mason; Massachusetts, Oliver Stevers; Michigan, Renj. Follett; Minnesota, Henry H. Sibley; Maryland, William S. Gittings: Missouri, John M. Krum; New Ha npshire, Aaron P. Hughes; New York, D. De Wolf: New Jersey, Alfred R. Spear; North Carolina, R R. Bridges; Ohio, James B. Steedman; Oregon, Isaac J. Stevens; Pennsylvania, H. M. North; Rhode Island, George H. Browne; Tennessee. Wm. H. Carroll; Vermont, Stephen Thomas; Virginia, E W. Hubbard; Wisconsin, P. H. Smith.

The question was then taken on the motion to adjourn till 5 o'clock. Before the vote was announced,

Mr. McCook called for a vote by States.

The question being taken by a call of the States, resulted as follows:

Yeas. Nays.

Maine,

8

North Carolina....

Yeas. Nays
10

Yeas. Nays.

Tennessee...
Kentucky

On motion of Mr. BUTTERWORTH, of New York, the Convention then

adjourned.

EVENING SESSION.

The Convention re-assembled at 5 o'clock.

Messrs. Fisher, of Virginia, Stetson, of New York, and King, of Missouri, desired information from the Chair, in relation to tickets of admission to the Convention.

MR. STUART. Mr. President, I rise merely to state that, according to my understanding, there can be no business that ought to occupy the attention of this Convention this evening. The Committee on Credentials will not report till to-morrow. I therefore move that the Convention adjourn.

The PRESIDENT. The Chair requests the gentleman to withdraw his motion for a moment, that the Chair may present a communication he has received to the Convention.

Mr. STUART. Certainly.

The motion to adjourn was accordingly withdrawn.

The PRESIDENT. Before proceeding to make that communication, the Chair desires to make a suggestion to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Fisher), and at the same time to make a suggestion to the Convention itself. At the assembling of this Convention at Charleston, a system of organization was adopted which involved the delivery of tickets for admission of members to the floor, the hall, and to their seats in the hall. That system was resumed at the assembling of the Convention in the city of Baltimore; and the duty devolved, as a matter of necessity, upon the Chair to direct the distribution of those tickets of admission. Was the Chair to give directions that all persons assuming to be members of this Convention should be admitted without tickets? Gentlemen, have we not been occupied in a debate of an entire day, the whole of which assumes that no gentleman shall come into this hall as a member, and take the seat of a member, without such a ticket of admission? What would have been the condition of things in this hall if there had been no system at the door of checking the admission of persons, and discriminating between those who were recognized as of right members of this Convention, and those who were not so recognized? Would it have been possible to have continued the deliberations of this body, with the free admission of persons at the doors of this hall, without any check or guard to their admission? The Chair submits it to the good sense of every member of this body that it would have been materially and morally impossible to go on without some provision for the delivery of tickets of members of this body at the door of this Convention. In this state of facts, in this evident necessity for some such provision, it appears that the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Fisher), had not obtained the ticket which, as the Chair is informed by the Sergeant-at-Arms, was, in the ordinary course of business, delivered to the Chairman of the Virginia delegion. If that was so, surely the Sergeant-atArms and the officers of the Convention can only regret that the accident occurred.

But beyond that fact, the Chair will submit to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Fisher), that the solemn appeal he has made to the country against this ordinary expedient of tickets for the admission of members to the Convention, is an appeal to the country against a primary and obvious necessity of order in the Convention. If the Convention shall desire to change that system, no person will accept that change more gratefully than the Chair. (Cries of " no change," no change ") The duties devolved upon me as the presiding officer of this Convention; the necessity of preserving order in the Convention; putting motions; hearing and deciding questions of order, and the other necessary duties of the Chair, are quite enough occupation for him, and he deeply regrets, that in addition to that occupation-in itself quite enough for him to discharge-there is devolved upon him, in regard to the

99 66