Jenks's Portland Gazette

PENNSYLVANIA LEGISLATURE.

Extract of a letter from a Gentleman at Lancaster dated Tuesday evening, 18th Nov.

"The Committee of Conference made their report to the House of Representatives this morning. It contains a long string of elaborate reasoning in justification of the House for the part it has acted in this business, calculated to impress the minds of the people that it is the fault of the Senate that there is no election bill; and it winds up with a resolution not to recede from the vote of non concurrence—

The question was instantly taken on this resolution, and carried by a large majority. Wm. Pearose then read a new bill in its place, containing the principle of a joint vote, but so modified that the Senate should nominate fifteen Electors, and the House of Representatives the like number; that, on Tuesday next, (after such nomination and a mutual notification thereof) the members of the two Houses should meet together and choose fifteen—FIVE whereof to be out of the Senate's nomination and TEN of the nomination of the House of Representatives. The bill was made the order of the day for this afternoon—the usual rules being dispensed with.

At 3 o'clock the House met, and the first section being under consideration, Mr. Mitchell, from Cumberland, rose, and solemnly declared his opposition to it. Not a word was uttered by any one else on either side of the House. The question was put, and, to the amazement of all parties, was lost! Thirty members only rising in favor of it—on the question being reversed. Thirty six rose. The House directly adjourned"

Accounts from Lancaster last evening, state, that the committee of conference made no report on Saturday; but that they were to meet yesterday morning to settle definitively what report they should make. It was generally understood at Lancaster, that there is no probability of an accommodation between them.