New-York tribune., 1867-08-28

amendment He said that II they took mp the report OF
the Committee on Finance alone they might a any SUP
scQuent time substitute section from the CANA COMMIT
tees report. ~
Mr GREELEY Rcp. westchcster) had voted all the
WAY through against discovering these questions re Na-
more favor OF devOtng this week % these report hhh
this week ard next. He cOnd not vote on hnahge
sdenng the finances OF the State. The reports "lel
considered together would not only give in Du NoH!1
k1r vIsIPI H. -i ~ ~; Chairman Of
the Finance Committee whether he would Alo" inc
Canal report 70 De first considered. , O., "A
Mr. CHURCH Dem, Orleans replied that he would
MIR vEPPI ANc favored the Joint consideration of the
two reports II was unjust 20 the Canal Comm'te 20
have the finance report upon question commune" ~
their special care first considered .
MI CHURCH (Dcm, orleans thought there was a
misapprehensiuu OF the effect OF the motion lIhdc ~
and the questions at could not be DECIDED apart
The question which report s 20 be ConslatIcu as e
Of the two must De taken Now they would 60 INTO the
Committee Of the Whole upon the report on the f2uSe
Committee. II an amendment from thc report o llt
Coma Committee Is adopted strikes out Just 50 much o
the report Of the Committee on Finance Inc gentleman
FINANCES nave oNeis.Olly i ' -. '' No IN tbc
M T frrod ~ r. II Woud he dishonest Improper ana
basis OF action ~ the Convention IN reference TO the
finances Of the state
MT AIV0RD rep Onondaga) did not desire to come
into collision with the gentleman from Orleans ChuIch
on this matter But ne must be frank enough to look
% long debate not only tie and management, bni
to fture nj tLe cauais was committed TO tc care Of
Canal Committee They were - have charge OF the
question Of the Improvement ot the canals out OF te
revenue. They report IN iavor OF enlargement ana I'm
UrOyCmcnt But In comes the Finance committee ana
reports against il. and destroys tie plan OF thr IahH
committee. They have thus Ovcrsteppcd their BOUNDS
deciding upon the questions Of their enlargement ana
Improvement IL only asked that the report ut the
Canal Committee should come In minority report
but 1t was considered that they had these questions OF
enlargement and improvement under thcr special care
and 10 right that they should Dc heard n the mat
ter.
Mr CONGER Dem, ROcllandl cOntended that The nc
ton of the Convention could only bc interpreted rs g'
ing 20 the Financial Committee general supervisor!
control over nil questions OF hc revenue, debl ana CA
pondture of The State. A. well might thg committees
ou the salt Works and Charities claim 70 be mdepcnd
cut OF the Finance Committee. The proper mode was
that suggested Ivy the gentleman from Orleans
Mr. HALE tRCp., Essex denied That the FINANCE CON
mtee had passed the limits assigned tnom by tho Con
In proof U tins lao read llo the leCOids Ol u
Convention journal.
Mr.. SEYMOUR rep, Rensselaer, was In favor Of the
amendment OF tho gentlemen iium OnOndaAa tMI AZ
voTdl. SIMPLY because De- believed % would save ine
Moreover the two subjects were so Intimately cnnecte5
that 30 was impossible to discover 1cm II oohadeltu
apart. the same ground must De gone over twice
The previous question was asked ana ordered.
The Yeas and Nays were d.m0ndcd upon the amcr0-
mcnt offered by Mr AyUrd, and was carried DJ vote
of g. 81. IS follows.