The Daily Advertiser

From the Newport Herald, of March 6.

GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

A motion having been made, and negatived, at a former session, for calling a Convention, to take into consideration, and decide upon the proposed Constitution of the United States of America, as recommended by the Convention held at Philadelphia in May last: A new motion was now made from that part of the House by whom the former motion had been negatived, "That the proposed Constitution should be submitted to the people at large." It was opposed, because it differed from the mode recommended by the Convention who formed the Constitution, and which mode had been adopted by all the States, that the public would receive a full and satisfactory discussion in a Convention, but this could not be expected in town meetings.

It was asked, if the Constitution should be rejected by the people, could a Convention be called? It was agreed it could not be done; but if the people should adopt it their ratification would not be valid, consequently a Convention must be called, and might not that Convention act contrary to the determination of the people? Notwithstanding the absurdity of this mode appeared in the most glaring colors, and the most important consequences were connected with an adoption or rejection of it, they continued tenacious of the motion, supporting it with this idea, that the Assembly were not empowered to call a Convention, it being with the people only to decide on a Constitution. And upon the question, "shall it be submitted to a Convention or to town-meetings?" there were 25 for calling a Convention, and 43 for submitting it to the people.

The Assembly afterwards passed the Act, a paragraph from which appeared in yesterday's paper.