Daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, Va. [W. Va.]) 1859-1865, 1861-12-14

Mr.. BRowS of Kanawha, opposed tht
amendment for the reasons, among others,
that it was taking territory with no nat
ural boundary or barrier between II an
the hostile country 70 the south OF It. an,
he bad been from the first an advocate
such boundaries and thatif they ineluje'
lthe only loyal territory east of Wis
vas proDosed to compose the new State
| the restored government of Virginia, when.
| the new State was admitted, would have NJ
place to set It's foot, and no territory d
| serve as a nucleus Of organization In tn
east,
ar. PARKkR opposed it on the grOuu'
that ander the generally understood plAi
! of adjusting the indebtedness OF the Stat
, by making each part Of the State pay Wha
| has been expended within each, these conn
ties would bring with them a heavy IN
debtedness for the railroads within their
limits.
ur. Hall of Marion, was inclined l.
favor the amendment for the reason tina
! the possessidn of these counties besides
/ protecting the capital would give them tn
1 right OF way directly TO the deep channel
/ the lower Potomac, which rs the neares
] aud most direct communication with th
seaboard might become matter OF higl
| consideration He did not however strong
| Iy urge the adoption of the measure
Mr.. DRRING opposed the amendment
he was opposed TO the annexation of sin
| gle 70 OF of territory not absolutely essen
| ttaI, and such he did not consider these tW'
counties. He did not want TO go on sol
Iofroying commission down into the yer.
heart of the Old Dominion. clear beyona
both the Allegheny and Blue Ridge ranges,
and pick out two counties, with nothing DO
air lines for their southern boundary. j.
i -
zion, aud delay, if.uot absolutely. defeat, thu.
new State, and as such he WAS opposed I.
the proposition.
The question was taken by ayes and noe
and the amendment was rejected.
| Nj. SaRErs moved to strike out lh"
/ counties of Hampshire and Hardy from tn
third resolution and insert them in the first
| which had been made TO include nncoudi
! tionally the counties of Pocahontas, Green
brier, Monroe, Mercer and Mcdowell.
His reason for offering this amendmen
Ewas that he believed these two couutie
had complied with the prov isions of tn
| Ordinance OF the August Convention, anu
were entitled to be considered part o
the State without going through the torn.
of voting again aud running the risk o.
being excluded by the action of the couu
ties with which they are now ciassed in th
third section.
SIR. CARsKADoS opposed this amendmen;
Of his colleague. He cOntended that tb
vote taken III Hampshtr and Hardy, meA-
j ger as il was, was no expression of a de-
sire to come in, and he thought such ae-
ton should depend in great measure
on that Of the counties with which they
were now classed, and that they should
have another opportunity of voting.
The question WAS taken by yeas and
nays and resulted:
4. YEAs-Messrs. Brown Of Kauawha, Chap
man, Cassidy, Dolly, HAnsley, Raymond
Irwin, Montague, D Brien, Parker, POmtroyi
Ruffner, Simmons, Sheets, Stuart of bod
dridg., Walker, Wilson aud Mr.. President
Hall, OF MasOu)-ls.
NAYs-Messrs. Brown of Preston, Brooks
Brumfeld, Caldwell, Carskadon, Ollie
Hall, of Marion, HarriPou, Hubhs, Harvey,
HAgar, Lamb, Lauek, Nation, Parsons
Powell, Paxton, Siusel, Stevenson o
r Wood, Stewart of Writ, SOper, Taylor
. Trainer, Van Wrinkle, and Warder-26.
So the amendment WAS rejected.
The question again REQUIRED on the
, adoption of the entire report.
Mr.. RHFPnBR moved TO insert in the
FIRST section, which Includes arbitrarily tn
counties of Pocahontas, Gresnbrier, Mon
i lroe, Mercer and Mcdowell, the counties o
Buchanan and Wise, which had beer
stricken out OF that section and placed II
the second and with it rejected.
: The motion gave rise to an extended Is
! cussion as to whether it was in order, i
being urged that it conflicted With the ST.
. rule, which sHys that matter once deter
! mined must stand as the sense of the Con
vention.
q The President ruled thatit was, in view
of the changes that had been made in th'
boundaries, in considering the report sine
those counties had been stricken out, q
new proposition, and required NO recon
, sideration of the former vote; and that IN
the present stage of the consideration o
the report, according to the rule applied IL
this report, amendments to strike out and
insert were in order, and this being mo-
r ton to insert, was strictly proper.
Mr. PABEER offered an amendment L
change the boundary of Buchanan county
, but Withdrew it.
The question on the adoption of Mr.
Ruffner's amendment was taken by aye!
and noes, and was rejected.
The Convention then took a recess