The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1912-02-13
BYRD'S PRIMARY
BILL CONSIDERED
Senate Committee Postpones
Action on Measure for
One Week.
OBJECTS TO EXPENSE LIMIT
Lieutenant-G Governor Ellyson and
Senator West Desire
Amendments.
OBJECTS TO EXPENSE LIMIT

mo BYRD primury bill made an
orderly debut in tho Senate last night
with harmless hearing before the
Committee on Privileges and EIec-
mons. Speakers were few ana objcc-
lions fewer The idea of a legalizeu
primary was strongly Endorsed b.
everybody. and only two or three OBJ
1cctions to the Byrd plan were raised.
AZ the end Of the hearing, which last
ca scarcely an hour end Il half, the
committee vent into executive session
End voted TO give Itself weeks time
In which To consider the provisions Of
the bili. carefully nAIng upon next
monday night as the time for its final
decision.
Richard Evelyn Byrd, father OF the
Bill. opened the hearing with n general
exposition of It's provisions. AS far
as possible. ne said. the bill aimed to
apply the general election laws now
In force, to primaries. Tho sentiment
OF the great mass OF Democrats and
Republicans he though. did not at this
time warrant the adoption OF com
puisory primary lax. and the measure
as II stands leaves the hUsding OF
primaries optional with the several
localities. He explained briefly the
provisions OF MS measure In regard to
fees OF candidates. qualification OF
voters, expenses OF candidates. and
other important features.
Fnvorn Fixed Expense Limit
Lieutenant Governor j. Taylor ELY
son aoundcd the first note OF dissent;
~ taking exception to the provision
or the bli limiting the amount OF
money 10 be expended by each can
d!date to a gum equal to 10 cents for
each vote cast in the preceding gen
erai election by the candidates party.
With u registered vote OF, for instance,
5000, said SIR LIlyson, the limit
would DC s7,5oo--a sum which would
practically put the poor MAJ out OF
t.lr running.
The permission 10 spend $500 he
eatd will not meet the objection made
to the holding o: primary elections
Frankly. l don't sec why there should
no Limitation whatever. But II you
are going TO place restriction make
IL real limitation. FIX the link OF
expenditure by any one candidate at
$1,000 OF si.5G0. ANA keep him inside
OF that. That would give the poor
man an equal caance with the wealthy
man"
who Can Vote.
Tho bill, objected Mr.. l5lIyson !s also
unsatisfactory in its provisions for as
cc-taininE who has the right 10 vote in
tho primary. u provides for "A test
based on the applicants vote In the
last general election, or on his sworr.
statement as 10 what party or men he
will support al the next election. This
point. In his opinion, was BY far tho
most important In the whole bill. and
should be given tho we!ghticst con-
alteration.
II we are to have law on the sub
tsct," said Mr.. Eilysoa. "then am In
Favor OF having that law framed by
mo state conventions 81 the respective
parties. They VIII be in better posi-
t!on TO decide who (. Republican and
who is Democrat. than any test that
We can frame. | am In favor OF leav :
Ing Il TO them to lay down the test
and making II then part OF this law
lie declared himself 10 be heartily in
favor OF a legaiizcd primary. even to
the extent OF being willing to put UP
with minor defects to secure the bcne-