The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1811-03-12

ton, Jackson, Jenkins. Kennedy, Living
ston, Macon, McBryde. Minor, Moseley
Pickman Pi'kin, Potter. Quincy. Randolph,
Shelley, Stanley, Stevenson, Sturges, Tag
CART, Tallmadge, Thompson, Van Dyke,
Van Horn, Van Rensselaer,, Wheaton,
Whitman-35.
NAYS-Messrs l.. ]. Aston, w Aston,
Anderson, Bard, Barry. Basset. Bib, Boy(,
Brown, Butler, Calhoun, Cheves. CLAY,
Cochran, Crawford. Cults, Dawson, Eppes,
Findley, Franklin, Gannett, Gardner. Ghol
son, Goodwin, Holland, Hufty, Johnson. Ke-
nan. Live, Lyle. M Kee, NICK nley, Mil
Ter, MitchiIl Montgomery, Mr.. Moore, T.
Moore, Morrow. Mumford, Newboit. New
ton. ]. Porter, p. b. Porter, Rea (P) Rhea
Q) Richards, Rmggold, Roane, Root Sage,
Sammons, Scudder, Seaver, Seybert, Shaw,
Sme.t, Smile, G. Smith, ]. smith, Tracy,
Troup, Turner, Weakley, Whitehil, Wither-
pom, Wreh SO
Mr.. Numford moved TO make verbal
amendment in the proviso tor excepting
from seizure vessels sailing for port be-
yond the Cape nf Cord Hope previous t. the
ION ot December.
Mr.. Pitk1n made motion to strike out
the whole hropiSo. He was unwilling that
such distinction should be made in fa.
vor OF particular class of merchants; he
footing
Mr.. Randolhh moved to re-commit the
sec,icn under consideration for the pur-
pose of Inserting the proviso just offered
by Mr.. Pitkin and reJected-Motion lost, 60
to 40.
Mr.. Pickmar, Mr.. Gardener and Mr.
Eppes opposed Nlr kin's motion
MIR. Stanley and Mr.. Potter spoke in favor
Of it.
The motion was negatived As to SO.
Nv. Mumford'S motion for a verbal a.
mendment WAS then carried
Ahou' half pat one
The question WAS taken on copcurring
with the COMMITTEE, of the whole in the
greement the ID section of Mr.. Eppes' "a
mendment, and Carried.
Mi Lyon moved to strike out so much
of the last section under consideration as
designates by numbers the sections of the
non-interCourse law to be revived and in
place thereof to insert the sections them.
selves ar large. He said that it would be
insulting the people of the United States
to pass the bill as 1t now stood as they
would not be able to ascertain the mean
ing of the law.
A division Of the question was calledfor.
and the question on striking out the words
proposed 70 be erased was decided by Yeas
ana Nays and ST.
For ukng out 10
Against il CT
1t was nov half past two o'clock in the
morning.
Mr. Lyon then called for the reading
of all the sections which were enumera. ed
IN the section under consideration.
The reading was objected to by Mr..
w. .distOn on the ground that il was on
ly tended to consume the time of the
Hcnse.
The question was stated by the Speaker
whether these sections should be read.
Mr.. GARDENER was speaking, rather diff
fusely on this question-when
THE PREVIOUS QUESTION ENFOe-
CED.
Mr.. Gholson called for the previous ques-
ton on the motion !or reading these sec.
tions,
The previous question was taken accor-
ding to the rules of the House, as follows ::
"S Shall the main question be now put ?" &
Carried in the affirmative.
Mr.. GARDENER then began to debate the
main question OH reading ehe document
MIR. Ghoi8on objected to debate IN this
stage OF the business as out of order. the
House having de ermined the previous cues
ton in the affirmative, and thereby prlclu
ded debate.
The Sneaker decided that, according to
the late practice of the House. was in or
der t. debate the main question, after he
previous Question had been taken H said
that this practice had been cs,ablis by
the House by a decision ,wo years ago, i'm
opposition to an opinion which he himself
had always entertained and had then del
clared. His decision On that occasion was
reversed, and he felt himself bound by hat
express on ni the sense of the House.
Mr. ChoiSon appealed from the decision
of the Speaker.
A debate commenced on this appeal #. m
the Speakers decision. Mr. p. Il. Porter
made question of order whether the APP
peal could be debated.
The Sneaker decided that such was tn
practice of the House. From this deci-
sion also an appeal was made by M, .P.
B. Porter, and the decision reversed, 66
t. 10.
The question REQUIRED on Mr. Gholson's
appeal ; the decision of the chair was re
versed-and it was decided by the House
that after the previous question was decided
in the affirmative, the main question should
not be debated.
The main question, viz " Shall the do
cument be read 20 as called for by Mr.. LIZ
on, was taken, and determined in the mega
tive.
Mr.. Bib moved that the bill be engrossed
and read third time, and called for the
previous question-But, at tue suggestion
OF Mr.. Troup, withdrew his motion in order
to en- ble Mr. Troup to propose a new sec
ton to the bill, authorising the President to