Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1811-03-12

Mr.. Eppes opposed Mr.. Pi,kin's mo

Mr.. Stanley and Mr.. Potter spoke
lin favor of it.
The motion was negstived 43 to 49,
Mr.. Mumtord's motion for verbal
amendment was then carried.
Abou, half past one
The question was taken on concur
ring with the committee of the whole
IN the agreement to the second secti-
on OF Mr.. EPPes's amendment, and
carried.
Mr. Lyon moved to strike out so
much of the last section under consi-
deraon as desigostes bv numbers the
sections OF the non-intrrcnurse law TO
be revived, and in place thereof to in
sert the sections themselves at large.
He said thas il would be insulting the
lpeopie Of the u. States to pass the
hill as it now stood, as they would not
be able to ascertain the meaning of
the law.
a division of the question was cal.
led Tor, and the question on striking
out the words proposed to be erased
was decided by Yeas & Nays, and lost.
For striking out 10
Against it CT
It was now half past two o'clock in
the morning.
Mr.. Lyon then called for the read
ling OF all the sections which were e.
Enumerated in the section under con.
|slderation-
The reading was objected to by Mr..
w. Aston, on the ground that IL was
only intended to consume the time of
the House.
The question was stated by the
Speaker whether these sections should
be read.
Mr.. GARDENER was speaking rather
diffusely on this question-when
THE PREVIOUS QUESTION
ENFORCED.
Mr.. Gholson called forthe previous
question on the motion for reading
these SECTIONS.
1he previous question was taken
according to the rules of the House,
as follows: " Shall the main question
be now putt" and carried in the af
irmative.
Mr. GARDENER then began to debate
the main question on reading the do
cument.
Mr.. Gholson objected to debate in
this stage of the business as oat of or.
der, the House having determined the
previous question in the Affirmative.
and thereby precluded debate.
The Speaker decided that, accor
ding to the late practice ofthe House.
1t was in order TO debate the main
question, after the previous question
had been taken. He said that this
practice had been established by the
House by decision two years age,
in opposition TO an opinion which he
himself had always entertained and
had then declared. His decision on
that occasion was reversed, and he
felt himself bound BY that expression
OF the sense Of the House.
Mr.. Gholson appealed from the de.
cIsion of the speaker.
A debate commenced on this an.
peal from the Speakers decision.-
Mr.. p. 3, Porter made a question oil
order whether the appeal could be de.
bated. The speaker decided that such
was the practice of the House. From
this decision also an appeal was made
bv MIR. 2. B. Porter, and the decision
reversed, 66 to IS.
The question required on Mr.. Ghol-
sons appeal; the decision of the chair
cas- reverse6--and it was decided bv
the House that after the previous oues~
ton was decided in the affirmative the
main question should not be debated. !
The main question, viz. "Shall the |
document be read 20 as called for by |
Mr.. Lyon, was taken, and determined |
in the negative. -
MIR. Bibb moved that The bill be en-
crossed and read third time, and
called for the previous question-But,
at the suggestion OF Mr.. Troup. with.
drew his motion in orderto enable Mr.
L. TO propose new section to the bill,
authorisipg the Presideut to employ a
number OF vessels TO enforce the pro-
visions of the bill.
MIR. Macon observed, that the sec
ton Offered by the gentleman from