Dillinger, Donagan, Donnell, Doran, Earle, Fleming, Foulk rod, Fry, Fuller, Gamble, Gilmore, Grenell, Harris, Hastings, Hayhurst, Helffenstein, Henderson, of Allegheny, Henderson, of Dauphin, Hiester, High, Hyde, Ingersoll, Jenks, Kennedy, Konigmacher, Krebs, Long, Lyons, Maclay, Magee, M'Call, M'Dowell, M'Saerry, Miller, Montgomery, Niven, Overfield, Payne, Pollock, Porter, of Lancaster, Porter, of Northampton, Reigart, Read, Riter, Ritter, Saeger, Scheetz, Scott, Sellers, Seltzer, Serrill, Shellito, Sill, Smyth, of Centre, Snively, Sterigere, Stickel, Sturdevant, Taggart, Thomas, Weaver, Weidman, White, Woodward, Sergeant, President-100.

Mr. CAREY said it was evident that the convention was not in a state to act understandingly on the subject, and he moved an adjournment-which was lost.

Mr. DUNLOP moved to amend the amendment, by striking therefrom all after the word" section," and inserting in lieu thereof the following, viz: "That the legislature in creating banking incorporations, shall so restrict them, that their cash liabilities shall at no time exceed six times the amount of their coin and bullion; and that no new bank shall hereafter be incorporated, except by the consent of the legislature, at two several sessions."

The amendment being under consideration,

Mr. DUNLOP moved an adjournment, which was not agreed to.

Mr. DUNLOP said, he considered this vote as an indication of a disposition on the part of the convention to hear him speak, and a call from such a quarter was too complimentary to be resisted. Sir, if a stranger should come into this convention and be informed that we, a grave hody of intelligent men, were voting upon all manner of propositions, without knowing what they were, he would be somewhat surprised. We are here voting down all propositions, whether right or wrong. The proposition which I have now offered, I consider as one which deserves the consideration of every reformer in the house. It goes to remedy all the evils which have been complained of by gentlemen on that side. The first complaint is, that there are too many banks, and the second, that there is too much paper issued by the banks. Now, my proposition goes to the restriction of the evil in both particulars. We have it from official documents, that our banks issue from fifteen to sixteen dollars in paper, for one in specie. The proportion is now reduced to four and a half, for one in specie. When business generally is revived, and confidence is restored, a fresh issue will take place.

How are the bank issues to be curtailed and kept within due bounds? In no way so well as by limiting their cash liabilities, by refusing them permission to issue more than the amount of their coin and bullion. The effect of the amendment which I propose, can be easily understood. The proposition goes to correct the whole evil complained of. It strikes me as very surprising that the reformers are not anxious to embrace a proposition which so fully accords with their own views. I am anxious to have their votes recorded on this amendment, in order to shew that in reality, they are anxious to keep up the disproportion between the issues of the banks and their specie on hand. There is no other way to restrict the banks and obviate the evils resulting from them, and from legislation in regard to them, than to impose this restriction on the banks, and to require that no charter shall be granted, except with the concurrence of

the legislature at two successive sessions. I do not desire to detain the committee. All I ask is the consideration and serious examintion of the project, in order that we may correct the evils complained of.

The question was then taken on the amendment, and it was decided in the negative, as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Ayres, Baldwin, Brown, of Lancaster, Cochran, Cope, Cox, Cunningham, Denny, Dunlop, Hays, Henderson, of Dauphin, Houpt, M'Call, Meredith, Merrill, Reigart, Royer, Russell, Snively--19.

NAYS-Messrs. Agnew, Banks, Barclay, Barndollar, Barnitz, Bedford, Bell, Biddle, Bigelow, Bonham, Brown, of Northampton, Brown, of Philadelphia, Carey, Chambers, Chandler, of Chester, Chandler, of Philadelphia, Clarke, of Beaver, Clarke, of Indiana, Cleavinger, Coates, Crain, Crawford, Crum, Cummin, Curll, Darlington, Darrah, Dillinger, Donagan, Donnell, Doran, Earle, Foulkrod, Fry, Fuller, Gamble, Gearhart, Gilmore, Grenell, Harris, Hastings, Hayhurst, Helffenstein, Henderson, of Allegheny, Hiester, High, Hopkinson, Hyde, Ingersoll, Jenks, Keim, Kennedy, Konigmacher, Krebs, Long, Lyons, Maclay, Magee, Mann, Martin, M'Cahen, M'Dowell, M'Sherry, Merkel, Miller, Montgomery, Nevin, Overfield, Payne, Pollock, Porter, of Lancaster, Porter, of Northampton, Read, Riter, Ritter, Saeger, Scheetz, Scott, Sellers, Seltzer, Serrill, Shellito, Sill, Smyth, of Centre, Smith, of Columbia, Sterigere, Stickel, Sturdevant, Taggart, Thomas, Todd, Weaver, Woodward, Young, Sergeant, President-95.

Mr. CHANDLER, of Chester, moved that the convention adjourn. Lost -ayes 57, noes 65.

Mr. PORTER, of Northampton, moved to amend the amendment, by striking out all after the word "section," and inserting:

"No charter of incorporation, for banking purposes, or for dealing in money, stock, securities, or paper credit, to be hereafter granted, shall exceed the duration of twenty years, nor shall the same be granted, renewed or extended where the capital authorized exceeds two millions and a half of dollars, without the concurrence of two successive legislatures, and the right shall be, and is reserved to the legislature, in like manner, to repeal, alter, or modify all banking charters of incorporation hereafter to be granted, or renewed, when the interests of the public shall so require; in such manner, however, that no injustice shall be done to the corporators."

Mr. KONIGMACHER called for the previous question; which was sus tained.

The question next recurring was "Shall the main question be now put?""

Mr. KONIGMACHER asked for the yeas and nays.

And the question being then taken, it was decided in the negativeyeas 56, nays 65.

YEAS-Messrs. Agnew, Ayres, Baldwin, Barndollar, Barnitz, Biddle, Brown, of Lancaster, Carey, Chambers, Chandler, of Chester, Chandler, of Philadelphia, Clapp, Coates, Cochran, Cope, Cox, Craig, Crum, Cunningham, Darlington, Denny, Dickey, Dickerson, Dunlop, Forward, Harris, Hays, Henderson, of Allegheny, Henderson, of Dauphin, Houpt, Jenks, Kerr, Konigmacher, Long, Maclay, M'Call, M'Sherry, Meredith, Merrill, Montgomery, Pennypacker, Pollock, Porter, of Lancaster, Reigart, Royer, Russell, Seagar, Scott, Serrill, Sill, Snively, Thomas, Todd, Weidman, Young, Sergeant, President-56.

NAYS-Messrs, Banks, Barclay, Bedford, Bell, Rigelow, Bonham, Brown, of Northampton, Brown, of Philadelphia, Clarke, of Indiana, Cleavinger, Crain, Crawford, Cummin, Curll, Darrah, Dillinger, Donagan, Donnell, Doran, Earle, Fleming. Foulkrod, Fry, Fuller, Gamble, Gearhart, Gilmore, Grenell, Hastings, Hayhurst, Helffenstein, Hiester, High, Hyde, Ingersoll, Keim, Kennedy, Krebs, Lyons, Magee, Mann, Martin, M'Cahen, M'Dowell, Merkel, Miller, Nevin, Overfield, Payne, Porter, of Northampton, Read, Riter, Ritter, Scheetz, Sellers, Seltzer, Shellito, Smith, of Columbia, Smyth, of Centre, Sterigere, Stickel, Sturdevant, Taggart, Weaver, Woodward-65.

The question being on agreeing to the amendment to the amendment offered by Mr. PORTER, of Northampton, it was taken, and determined in the negative, yeas 37, nays 81, as follow, viz:

YEAS-Messrs. Agnew, Ayres, Barndollar, Biddle, Brown, of Lancaster, Carey Clarke, of Beaver, Cope, Cox, Crain, Crum, Dillinger, Donagan, Gamble, Gearhart, Hays, Henderson, of Dauphin, Kennedy, Kerr, Konigmacher, Maclay, M'Sherry, Meredith, Merrill, Merkel, Pennypacker, Pollock, Porter, of Lancaster, Porter, of Northampton, Reigart, Royer, Russell, Scott, Smith, of Columbia, Snively, Thomas, Young.-37.

NAYS-Messrs. Baldwin, Banks, Barclay, Barnitz, Bedford, Bell, Bigelow, Bonham, Brown, of Northampton, Brown, of Philadelphia, Chambers, Chandler, of Chester, Chandler, of Philadelphia, Clapp, Clark, of Dauphin, Clarke, of Indiana, Cleavinger, Coats, Cochran, Craig, Crawford, Cummin, Cunningham, Curll, Darlington, Darrah, Denny, Dickey, Dickerson, Donnell, Doran, Earle, Fleming, Foulkrod, Fry, Fuller, Gilmore, Grenell, Harris, Hayhurst, Henderson, of Allegheny, Hiester, High, Hopkinson, Houpt, Hyde, Ingersoll, Jenks, Keim Krebs, Long, Lyons, Magee, Mann, Martin, M'Cahen, M'Call, M'Dowell, Miller, Montgomery, Nevin, Overfield, Read, Riter, Ritter, Saeger, Scheetz, Sellers, Seltzer, Serrill, Shellito, Sill, Smyth, of Centre, Sterigere, Stickel, Sturdevant, Taggart, Todd, Weaver, Woodward, Sergeant, President-81.

Mr. PORTER, of Northampton, moved an adjournment; lost,

Mr. DARLINGTON moved to amend the amendment by striking out "six," and inserting "three." He said he was in favor of three months' notice

The question being taken, the motion to amend the amendment was rejected; yeas 59, nays 64, as follow, viz:

YEAS--Messrs. Agnew, Ayres, Baldwin, Barndollar, Barnitz, Biddle, Brown, of Lancaster, Carey, Chambers, Chandler, of Chester, Chandler, of Philadelphia, Clapp, Clarke, of Beaver, Clark, of Dauphin, Coates, Cochran, Cope, Cox, Craig, Crum, Cunningham, Darlington, Denny, Dickey, Dickerson, Forward, Harris, Hays, Henderson, of Allegheny, Henderson, of Dauphin, Hopkinson, Houpt, Jenks, Kerr, Konigmacher, Long, Maclay, M'Call, Meredith, Merrill, Merkel, Montgomery, Payne, Pennypacker, Pollock, Porter, of Lancaster, Porter, of Northampton, Reigart Royer, Russell, Saeger, Scott, Serrill, Sill, Snively, Thomas, Todd, Weidman, Sergeant, President-59.

NAYS-Messrs. Banks, Barclay, Bedford, Bell, Bigelow, Bonham, Brown, of Northampton, Brown, of Philadelphia, Clarke, of Indiana, Cleavinger, Crain, Crawford, Cummin, Curll, Darrah, Dillinger, Donagan, Donnell, Doran, Dunlop, Earle, Fleming, Foulkrod, Fry, Fuller, Gamble, Gearhart, Gilmore, Grenell, Hastings, Hay, hurst, Helffenstein, Hiester, High, Hyde, Ingersoll, Keim, Kennedy, Krebs, Lyons, Magee, Mann, Martin, M'Cahen, M'Dowell, M'Sherry, Miller, Nevin, Overfield, Read, Riter, Ritter, Scheetz, Sellers, Seltzer, Shellito, Smith, of Columbia, Smyth, of Centre, Sterigere, Stickel, Sturdevant, Taggart, Weaver, Woodward-64,

Mr. CHANDLER, of Chester, moved an adjournment-which was disagreed to.

Mr. CHANDLER, of Philadelphia, moved that the convention now recon. sider the vote of this evening on the amendment offered by Mr. PORTER, of Northampton, to the amendment, being in the words following, viz:

"No charter of incorporation for banking purposes, or for dealing in money, stock, securities, or paper credit, to be hereafter granted, shall exceed the duration of twenty years, nor shall the same be granted, renewed or extended, where the capital authorized exceeds two millions and a half of dollars, without the concurrence of two successive legislatures, and the right shall be, and is reserved to the legislature, in like manner, to repeal, alter, or modify all banking charters of incorporation hereafter to be granted, or renewed, when the interests of the public shall so require, in such manner, however, that no injustice shall be done to the corporations.'

And the question being on the reconsideration,

Mr. DENNY expressed a wish that the question should be divided, but did not press it as a motion.

Mr. CHANDLER, of the city of Philadelphia, said it appeared that when the question was taken on the amendment of the gentlemen from Northampton, (Mr. Porter) it was not so well understood as it ought to be, and he moved a reconsideration of the vote, by which that amendment was rejected.

The question being on the motion to reconsider, the yeas and nays were required by Mr. BIDDLE and Mr. INGERSOLL, and are as follow, viz:

YEAS-Messrs. Agnew, Ayres, Baldwin, Barndollar, Barnitz, Biddle, Brown, of Lancaster, Carey, Chambers, Chandler, of Chester, Chandler, of Philadelphia, Clapp, Clarke, of Beaver, Clark, of Dauphin, Coates, Cochran, Cope, Cox, Craig, Crum, Cunningham, Darlington, Denny, Dickey, Dickerson, Dunlop, Forward, Harris, Hays, Henderson, of Dauphin, Hopkinson, Houpt, Jenks, Kerr, Konigmacher, Long, Maclay, M'Call, M'Sherry, Meredith, Merrill, Montgomery, Pennypacker, Pollock, Porter, of Lancaster, Porter, of Northampton, Reigart, Royer, Russell, Saeger, Scott, Serrill, Sill, Snively, Thomas, Todd, Weidman, Young, Sergeant, President-59.

NAYS-Messrs. Banks, Barclay, Bedford, Bell, Bigelow, Bonham, Brown, of Northampton, Brown, of Philadelphia, Clarke, of Indiana, Cleavinger, Crain, Crawford, Cummin, Curll, Darrah, Dillinger, Donagan, Donnell, Doran, Earle, Fleming, Foulkrod, Fry, Fuller, Gamble, Gearhart, Gilmore, Grenell, Hastings, Hayhurst, Helffenstein, Hiester, High, Hyde, Ingersoll, Keim, Kennedy. Krebs, Lyons, Magee, Mann, Martin, M'Cahen, M'Dowell, Merkel, Miller, Nevin, Overfield, Read, Riter, Ritter, Scheetz, Sellers, Seltzer, Shellito, Smith, of Columbia, Smyth, of Centre, Sterigere, Stickel, Taggert, Weaver, Woodward-62.

So the question was determined in the negative.

Mr. DUNLOP moved to amend the amendment, by striking therefrom all after the word "section," and inserting in lieu thereof the following, viz:

"That no banking corporation shall hereafter permit their notes in eirculation and deposite to exceed their coin, beyond the proportion of seven to one; and no such corporation shall be hereafter created, except by a vote of two-thirds of both houses of the legislature."

The amendment to the amendment being under consideration,

Mr. DUNLOP moved an adjournment, which was disagreed to.

Mr. DUNLOP said he did not desire to occupy any more of the time of the convention than was necessary in order to explain his object. It was necessary, he said, to place an idea two or three times before some men's minds before they would be able to comprehend it. He had always had his doubts whether the reformers here, really wished to restrict the banks in any manner. His doubts were strengthened by the recent vote in the legislature of New York, when a bill creating banks, passed by a vote of ten to one. Mr. Marcy, the governor of New York, and great leader of the Van Buren party there, had come out with a recommendation of the suspension of the law restraining the issue of small notes, and it had passed the lower house by a vote of ninety-two to ten. Is it possible to believe that there is not a consanguinity between the loco focos of New York and their friends, and allies here. The loco focos, who pretend here to be the exclusive friends of reform, talk of evils attending the banking system, but they will agree to no proposition. having in view the arrest of those evils. He wished it to appear on the journals of this body, that the reformers here were opposed to any proposition for restraining the immoderate issues of bank paper. He wished the people to understand that these reformers would not agree to restrict the issues of the banks to a certain amount, in proportion to their specie. He wanted to see how many of them, and who, would vote against this proposition.

The amendment of the gentleman from Lancaster, under consideration, would not, in his opinion, answer any useful purpose. It would not reach the evils complained of, but this proposition would effectually remove them.

He had, he said, seen the amendment of the gentleman from Susquehanna, (Mr. Read) paraded in the Globe, and he had no doubt that it would be pretended that the reformers here, who vote down every proposition to restrict the banks, are in favor of restricting the banks, while the conservatives are opposed to it. Now he wanted to see who was who, and who would record their names against this effectual restriction of the banks. He wanted to show his constituents who were opposed to his two propositions for preventing the banks from getting into insolvency, and he wanted the newspapers to promulgate the fact that we, the conservatives, took the only course that was possible for the removal of the evils. of the banking system. It was still, he said, seven or eight hours to day light and there was an abundance of time for getting the yeas and nays on this important question. He wanted to see how many would act under their new orders from Washington. The new voice from that quarter, is in favor, not of destroying the banks, but only of regulating

them.

Now he would ask any gentleman here if he does not know and believe that his proposition would place the banks in a situation in which they could never have occasion to suspend specie payments, while, on the other hand, they cannot resume specie payments as long as their liabilities are so great in proportion to their specie as they have been in times past The disproportion has been as great as sixteen for one. Every one here knows that the local banks cannot restrain themselves without national institution, unless some means, like those which I now propos be adopted. We are more willing and anxious to take the vote to night We want to show the country that we have done every thing we cou

a