But the gentleman has said that it was caused in this way: The creation of so many banks, had made many speculators; drawn off attention from agricultural pursuits, and had prevented much grain from being raised in this country within the last two or three years. Now, sir, said Mr. C., it is a notorious fact that the wheat crops of this country, for some years back, have been destroyed by the hessian fly, and if the gentleman means to say, that the creation of so many banks has bred the hessian fly in this country, I cannot tell how he came to his conclusion. It is a well known fact, that in the counties of Columbia, Franklin, York, Lancaster, Chester, Berks, Schuylkill, and a vast number of other counties, the wheat was almost entirely destroyed by the fly. That was generally understood. Then, if it be true that the banks have been so entirely worthless, and so corrupt as a body, to breed the hessian fly, which destroyed our grain, and almost brought the good people of this country to starvation, it is high time that some restrictions should be placed upon them. But, sir, this is an entirely new idea to me, and I should like to know of some of these gentlemen who are informed upon the subject, in what department of the bank this fly was created.

It seems to me that gentlemen ought to examine into this subject, for it is of great importance to the farmers of this state. If the gentleman from Indiana will only prove to my satisfaction, and to the satisfaction of the people of Pennsylvania, that the banks were the origin of the fly which destroys our wheat, I will pledge myself to go for any restrictions which he may ask, and I will further pledge myself, that the people of Pennsylvania will sustain him in his restrictions.

Now, sir, as the gentleman from Susquehanna, the gentleman from Indiana, and some other gentlemen, are so much opposed to all paper money, and are in favor of nothing but gold and silver, and wish to keep every thing like banks and bank paper out of the community, I will make a bargain with them in relation to this matter. If they will propose to this convention any plan by which they can prevent all paper money from circulating through, or going into their counties, I will vote for it. I am willing that they should exclude it entirely from circulation in their districts. I will allow them to keep it out of circulation entirely in their own counties. I hope they will allow us to have what we want in our counties.

If these gentlemen wish to have all paper money excluded from their counties, and will introduce a proposition which will apply alone to their own counties, I think we can all vote for it, and they can then have all the advantages of their hard money project. They can destroy the credit system entirely in their own counties, and then they will see how the gold humbug will work. They can then have a fair opportunity of trying the experiment, without injuring any body, but their own constituents. I have no particular objections to their taking care of their own constituents, as they think fit; but, I am not willing that they should destroy the credit system in my county, and in those counties where I know the people are favorable to it.

I shall now bring to the notice of the convention, an extract from a certain document, in relation to the sub-treasury scheme, because that is to have a very material and a very important bearing on the banking institutions of the country.

The extract I am about to read, is from one of the messages of Andrew Jackson, and I seleet it, because I think it will be looked upon by gentlemen, as being sufficiently orthodox, and I hope the gentleman from Westmoreland (Mr. Barclay) will pay particular attention to it, as he at one time would have stood by this message against the world. Well, General Jackson, in this message says that,

"To retain it in the treasury, unemployed in any way, is impracticable. It is, besides, against the genius of our free institutions, to lock up in vaults, the treasure of the nation."

President Jackson, in this message said that "it is against the genius of our free institutions, to lock up in vaults, the treasure of the nation " Now, is it not passing strange, that in one short year, or less, after such a sentiment as this was promulgated by the leader of the party, that the party should go for the very measures here deprecated? Was it not strange, that in less than a year from the time that this opinion was expressed, that a special session of congress should be called, for the purpose of having the money of the nation locked up in vaults, and giving the government the right to issue shinplasters for it.

The CHAIR here announced to the delegate, that the hour, which the rule prescribed, had expired.

Mr. Cox: Has the Chair taken into account the interruptions which I met with, by being called to order, and prevented from proceeding regularly?

The CHAIR said, that he had taken these into account.

Mr. M'CAHEN moved that the gentleman have leave to proceed. Lost without a division.

Mr. PORTER, of Northampton, moved that the convention adjourn.
Tellers were called for by several gentlemen.

The CHAIR said, that there was no rule of the house, for the appointment of tellers. The Chair had appointed tellers once or twice, in the course of the evening, to aid, him when there was considerable confusion in the hall, but there was no rule to authorize it.

The PRESIDENT then divided the house, and announced fifty-five in favor of adjourning and fifty-three against it.

Mr. FULLER: I have counted as many as sixty in the negative. I therefore appeal from the decision of the Chair, and ask for tellers.

The CHAIR stated that he had counted with great care.

Mr. EARLE: I counted very carefully, and I counted fifty in the affirmative and sixty in the negative.

Mr. WOODWARD said, there was evidently a clear majority against adjourning, and he hoped tellers would be appointed to satisfy the convention of the fact.

The CHAIR said, there was no rule of the convention, which authorized the appointment of tellers.

Mr. STERIGERE hoped that the Chair would count again, so that the convention might be satisfied as to the accuracy of the count.

Mr. FULLER: I have appealed from the decision of the Chair, with a view of having tellers appointed, and I now insist upon that motion being carried out.

The CHAIR then appointed Mr. DENNY and Mr. DONAGAN tellers, who counted and announced fifty four in the affirmative, and sixty-one in the negative.

So the motion to adjourn was disagreed to.

Mr. DUNLOP then called for the yeas and nays on his amendment, which were ordered, and were-yeas 23; nays 90; as follow:

YEAS-Messrs. Baldwin, Brown, of Lancaster, Cochran, Crum, Cunningham, Darlington, Dickey, Dunlop, Hays, Meredith, Merrill, Montgomery, Pennypacker, Pollock, Porter, of Lancaster, Royer, Russell, Sill, Snively, Sturdevant, Thomas, Todd, Young-23.

NAYS-Messrs. Banks, Barclay, Barndollar, Barnitz, Bedford, Bell, Biddle, Bigelow, Bonham, Brown, of Northampton, Brown, of Philadelphia, Carey, Chandler, of Chester, Chandler, of Philadelphia, Clapp, Clark, of Dauphin, Clarke, of Indiana, Cleavinger, Coates, Cox, Craig, Crain, Crawford, Cummin, Curll, Darrah, Denny, Dickerson, Dillinger, Donagan, Donnell, Doran, Earle, Farrelly, Fleming, Foulkrod, Fry, Fuller, Gamble, Gearhart, Gilmore, Hastings, Hayhurst, Helffenstein, Henderson, of Dauphin, Hiester, High, Houpt, Hyde, Ingersoll, Jenks, Keim, Kennedy, Konigmacher, Krebs, Long, Lyons, Maclay, Magee, Mann, Martin, M'Cahen, M'Call, M'Sherry, Merkel, Miller, Overfield, Porter, of Northampton, Reigart, Read, Riter, Ritter, Saeger, Scheetz, Scott, Sellers, Seltzer, Serrill, Shellito, Smith, of Columbia, Smyth, of Centre, Sterigere, Stickel, Taggart, Weaver, Weidman, Woodward, Sergeant, President-90.

So the amendment was rejected.

Mr. PORTER, of Northampton, moved to amend the amendment, by inserting after the word "commonwealth," the words: "in such manner, however, that no injustice shall be done to the corporators."

Mr. INGERSOLL, of Philadelphia county, said he did not recollect whose amendment it was that was now proposed to be amended. He hoped, however, that no injustice would be done to any body.

Mr. CAREY, of Bucks, asked for the yeas and nays.

And, the question being taken on the amendment to the amendment, it was decided in the affirmative-yeas 94; nays 21; as follow:

YEAS-Messrs. Agnew, Baldwin, Banks, Barndollar, Barnitz, Bedford, Bell, Biddle, Bigelow, Bonham, Brown, of Lancaster, Brown, of Northampton, Carey, Chandler, of Chester, Chandler, of Philadelphia, Clapp, Clarke, of Beaver, Clark, of Dauphin, Clarke, of Indiana, Cleavinger, Coates, Cochran, Cox, Craig, Crain, Crawford, Crum, Cummin, Cunningham, Darlington, Denny, Dickey, Dickerson, Donagan, Donnell, Doran, Dunlop, Fleming, Gamble, Gearharı, Gilmore, Harris, Hayhurst, Hays, Henderson, of Dauphin, Hiester, Ingersoll, Jenks, Keim, Kennedy, Kerr, Konigmacher, Krebs, Long, Lyons, Maclay, Martin, M'Cahen, M'Call, M'Dowell, M'Sherry, Meredith, Merrill, Merkel, Montgomery, Pennypacker, Pollock, Porter, of Lancaster, Porter, of Northampton, Purviance, Reigart, Read, Riter, Ritter, Royer, Russell, Saeger, Scheetz, Scott, Sellers, Seltzer, Serrill, Shellito, Sill, Smyth, of Centre, Snively, Sturdevant, Taggart, Thomas, Todd, Weaver, Weidman, Woodward, Sergeant, President-94,

NAYS-Messrs. Barclay, Brown, of Philadelphia, Curll, Darrah, Dillinger, Foulkrod, Fry, Fuller, Grennell, Hastings, Helffenstein, High, Houpt, Hyde, Magee, Mann, Miller, Overfield, Smith, of Columbia, Sterigere, Stickel-21.

The question then recurred on agreeing to the amendment as amended. Mr. FARRELLY, of Crawford, asked for the yeas and nays,

And the question being taken, it was decided in the affirmative-yeas 86; nays 29; as follow:

YEAS-Messrs. Agnew, Banks, Barclay, Barndollar, Bedford, Bell, Bigelow, Bonham, Brown, of Northampton, Brown, of Philadelphia, Carey, Clapp, Clarke, of Beaver, Clark, of Dauphin, Clarke, of Indiana, Cleavinger, Cochran, Craig, Crain, Crawford, Crum, Cummin, Cunningham, Curll, Darrah, Dickerson, Dillinger Donagan, Donnell, Doran, Earle, Fleming, Foulkrod, Fry, Fuller, Gamble, Gearhart, Gilmore, Grennell, Hastings, Hayhurst, Helffenstein, Hiester, High, Hyde, Ingersoll, Jenks, Keim, Kennedy, Kerr, Konigmacher, Krebs, Lyons, Maclay, Magee, Mann, Martin, M'Cahen, M'Call, M'Dowell, Merkel, Miller, Montgomery, Overfield, Porter, of Northampton, Purviance, Reigart, Read, Riter, Ritter, Royer, Russell, Saeger, Scheetz, Sellers, Seltzer, Shellito, Smith, of Columbia, Smyth, of Centre, Sterigere, Stickel, Sturdevant, Taggart, Thomas, Weaver, Woodward-86.

NAYS-Messrs. Baldwin, Barnitz, Biddle, Brown, of Lancaster, Chandler, of Chester, Chandler, of Philadelphia, Coates, Cox, Darlington, Denny. Dickey, Farrelly, Harris, Hays, Henderson, of Dauphin, Houpt, Long, M'Sherry, Meredith, Pennypacker, Pollock, Porter, of Lancaster, Scott, Serrill, Sill, Snively, Todd, Weidman, Sergeant, President-29.

Mr. STERIGERE moved that the amendment be engrossed for a third reading.

Mr. WOODWARD hoped that the first article would be disposed of this morning. We were obliged to sit all day yesterday to dispose of the amendments which had been for five weeks under consideration. He hoped the subject would be now finally disposed of.

Mr. INGERSOLL: I do trust that the whole article will be disposed of to-night.

Mr. DENNY Submitted whether it was proper to order the engrossment, before the question had been taken on the motion made by the gentleman from Philadelphia, (Mr. Chandler) to reconsider the vote on the subject of divorces.

Mr. INGERSOLL saw no reason why the subject of divorces should not be acted on now. He regarded it as a subject of vastly greater importance

than this.

The amendments were then ordered to be postponed and engrossed for a third reading; and the amendments were referred to a committee for that purpose.

Mr. GRENNELL moved an adjournment. Lost.

Mr. STERIGERE moved that when this convention adjourns, it adjourn to meet on Monday morning.

Mr. DICKEY demanded the yeas and nays on this motion, and being taken, they were as follow:

YEAS-Messrs. Agnew, Baldwin, Barclay, Barnitz, Bell, Bonham, Brown, of Philadelphia, Carey, Chandler, of Chester, Chandler, of Philadelphia, Clarke, of Beaver, Clark, of Dauphin, Clarke, of Indiana, Coates, Crain, Cummin, Cunningham, Curll, Darlington, Dillinger, Donagan, Doran, Farrelly, Fleming, Foulkrod, Gamble, Gilmore, Hastings, Helffenstein, Henderson, of Dauphin, Hiester, Hyde, ngersoll, Jenks, Long, Lyons, Martin, M'Cahen, M'Dowell, Meredith, Merrill,

Overfield, Porter, of Lancaster, Porter, of Northampton, Purviance, Reigart, Read, Riter, Russell, Scheetz, Scott, Sellers, Serrill, Sterigere, Sturdevant, Taggart, Thomas, Weaver, Woodward, Sergeant, President-60.

NAYS-Messrs. Banks, Barndollar, Biddle, Bigelow, Brown, of Lancaster, Clapp, Cleavinger, Crawford, Crum, Darrah, Denny, Dickey, Donnell, Earle, Fuller, Gearhart, Hayhurst, High, Houpt, Keim, Kennedy, Konigmacher, Krebs, Maclay, Magee, M'Call, M'Sherry, Merkel, Miller, Montgomery, Pollock, Ritter, Saeger, Seltzer, Shellito, Smith, of Columbia, Smyth, of Centre, Snively, Stickel, Todd—40. So the question was determined in the affirmative.

The convention then adjourned at half past one o'clock on Saturday morning, until half past nine o'clock on Monday morning.

MONDAY, JANUARY 15, 1838.

Mr. MEREDITH, of Philadelphia, presented a memorial from citizens of Philadelphia, praying that the constitution may be amended, in the provision relative to the qualifications of voters, by inserting the word "white," so that it should read "every free white citizen of the age of twenty-one years," &c. shall have the right of election.

Mr. MEREDITH moved that the memorial be printed.

Mr. EARLE, of Philadelphia county, moved to amend the said motion by adding to the end thereof the words following, viz; "and that the memorial of Charles W. Gardner and Frederick A. Hinton, in behalf of the people of colour, in the city and county of Philadelpha, presented on the 6th instant, be also printed.

Mr. DICKEY, of Beaver, asked for the yeas and nays on the amendment, and they were ordered.

Mr. BROWN, of Philadelphia county, expressed a hope that the memorial would be printed. It contained an able argument on the subject. He hoped that all the documents would be before the convention before the discussion came up.

Mr. HIESTER, of Lancaster, thought it was not in order to take up a motion to print a memorial which had been rejected by the convention.

The PRESIDENT decided that the motion was in order, as it was to connect the printing of this document with that of another.

Mr. BANKS, of Mifflin said, much as he was willing to grant the right of petition to its full extent, and to listen to all petitions which might be sent in to the convention, he was not in favor of this motion to print. The gentleman from Philadelphia county, (Mr. Brown) had said we ought to