The Ocala banner. (Ocala, Marion County, Fla.) 1883-194?, 1913-11-14
GOVERNOR TRAMMELL AND THE
BRYAN PRIMARY LAW
Tallahassee, Fla, Nov. u 1913.

vile Metropolis, relative to certain
changes made II the Bryan primary
law, issues statement as follows:
Il plead guilty to at least party
being responsible for the amendment
to the Bryan primary law providing
for the registration books to he opel
in each of the voting precincts for
two months preceding the primary Oi
1914, and for the books to be open for
one month in each voting precinct
preceding each general primary cleo
ton thereafter. did prepare this
amendment and advocated its adop-
tion by. the legislature. It was adopt
ed by majority of over two-thirds Of
the members of the house, although
il was opposed by the members hav-
ing Senator Bryan's bin in charge.
II also prepared an amendment to
the measure providing that after the
new and complete registration in
1914, that registration should not be
required every two years thereafter
by the voters who properly register
ed in 1914, except in the large cities.
It being provided in this amendment
for a transfer from one political par
ty to another if the person desiring
the transfer made application for the
transfer at least ninety days prior 10
a general primary. This amendment
was voted for by good majority OF
the members of the house, but failed
of adoption on account of two-thirds
vote being necessary.
II have no apology TO offer for my
part in connection with either of these
amendments. / believed when the
legislature was in session, and am
still of the opinion now, that these
two amendments were desirable.
The Bryan primary measure, as
originally prepared and introduced in
the legislature, only required that the
registration officer should open the
registration book for as much as one
day, in each election precinct be-
tween November 1st and December
31st, and that from January LIST TO
May LIST the books should be open
at the county seat AS originally in
troGuced, the measure prescribed only
one registration book and a duplicate
thereof for the entire county. To
register, the voter had to write his
name in this book at the time of his
registration, therefore making it i'm
possible for registration to be carried
on in more than one precinct on the
same day.
at was my opinion that the meas
ure, did not afford reasonable oppor
tunity for convenient and inexpensive !
registration to those living in election
precincts other than those in which !
the court houses we're located. The |
citizen who happened to live at the
county seat, or near by, had reasona- !
BILE opportunity for convenient and in
expensive registration for four
months. On the other hand, Mr.. Bry-
tration book TO be open for as much
as one day in the precincts through. !
out the county, and this only during
November and December, five or six
months before the primary. In other
words, citizen to register in his own
precinct must register on such day
in November or December as the reg
istration officer designates, or else be
forced to lose the time and pay the
expense of the trip from his home
precinct to register at the county seat
some time between January LIST and
May LIST.
Thinking a measure which in its
:. operation would work such discrim-
ination against the voters who did
not live in or near the county seat
towns was all wrong, / prepared the
amendment which now gives a per-
son opportunity to register in his own
precinct any time during the month
OF January or February.
The man who lives in a precinct
ten, fifteen, twenty or twenty-five
miles from the court house, helps to
pay the expenses of carrying on reg
istration just as much as the man who
lives at or near the county seat. He
is as much entitled to reasonable time
to register within his precinct with
out unnecessary loss of time or ex-
pense as if he lived at or near the !
county seat. played my part in CIV
ing him this privilege.
Had the original measure not been
amended so as to require the regis
tration books to be open for more
than one day in the precincts away
from the county seat, would have
vetoed the measure if it had passed,
although heartily in sympathy with
some of it's good features, and would