{"character_count": 1371, "word_count": 252, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9829000234603882], "ccnet_perplexity": [1035.9000244140625], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
we must correct mistake or two contain. ed in the last Gazette. The article in that paper, containing the debate on the appor- tionment bill, is in the main correct, as our readers may see, by comparing it with the ar ticle above. The amendment of Mr. Walk CT of Washington, that every 800 free white inales should elect a delegate, provided that every county should have one, was not con- cured in by theCouncil On Friday. in the House, Mf. Cummins renewed his amend ment to that amendment, to which Mr. Will son offered still another amendment, which twas lost-and Mr. Cummins withdrew his amendment, and the bill passed, by vote of ll26 to :. It was then sent to the Council, where it was discussed, but not amended un- til Saturday, when 1t was so amended as to make the Convention consist of as many members as there now are in both Houses, elected in the same way; and the bill passed the Council as amended, by majority of IT to Il. It was taken up on Monday, in the House, and further amended by motion of MT Walker of Washington, and the Council con- cured in the amendment. The vote on the final passage of the bill, stood, in the House, 27 to (. In the Council, 9 to 4. Those who voted against it were, in the Council, Messra. Judkins, Kuykendall, Mills, and Thornton--in the House, Messrs. Ellis, Peel, Shaw, scruggs, Walker of Hampstead, and Wilson of Clark.