|
NEWS CONFERENCE
GOVERNOR PARRIS BRYANT
TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA
JULY 26, 1962
NEWSRBN PARTICIPATING: Charles Aldinger, UNITED PRESS INTERNATIONAL;
Georgiana Bateman, FLORIDA BROADCAST NEWS; Vernon Bradford, TAMPA
TRIBUNE; Robert w. Delaney, ORLANDO SENTINEL STAR; Tom Dunn, wow;
Lou Merritt. HDTV} Jerry Mock, JOHN R. PERRY PAPERS; Allen Morris,
ORACKBR POLITICS; Steve Prentice, FLORIDA BROADCAST Haws; Ray Starr,
WEBB; Stan Terilton, FLORIDA BROADCAST NEWS; Rick Tuttle, MIAMI EBRALD
-8T. PETERSBURO TIMES SERVICE; Martin Haldron, 8T. PBTBRSBURO TIMES-
MIAMI HERALD SERVICE; Bill Watkins, WCTV; Paul Willa, ASSOCIATED PRESS.
GOVERNOR: Good morning.
I visited yesterday in Washington with Senator Holland,
Senator Smathera, Congressmen Bob Bikes, Congressman Rsrlong,
Congressman-nominee John Sutton, and Mr. Allen Masons, who is the
special assistant to the Secretary of the Air Force, for installations;
Mr. Segall of the Bureau of Public Roads; an official, whose name I
now forget, with the Department of Defense, and a number of other
people, relative to some or the problems posed by the necessity and
desirability of federal-state cooperation in the matter or access
roads in Brevard County related to Canaveral. Recently it was our
information that the Air Force officials at Patrick had forwarded to
Washington a proposal -- a report -- relative to access roads, which
called for the four-laning of AlA from Patrick Air Force Base south
to Indialantic; for the four-lasing or State Road 520 from Cocoa to
Cocoa Beach; the four-laning or the Eau Callie Causeway, and the
construction or a new causeway from US 1 to Patrick Air Force Base.
This report was apparently held up in the office of the Secretary for
Air, or some assistant of his, because of a feeling that an agreement
allegedly entered into by the Road Department in 1957 and '58 with
the Department of Defense or the Bureau of Public Roads or other
agencies, had not been complied with. The background or that
apparently is that in 1957 or '58 there was another such study as this
one that went to washington recently and, as a result of that study,
the Air Force agreed to put up roughly a million and a half, the state
was to put up roughly a million and a half to tour-lane Ali from
Patrick to Indialantic. The state said: "We don't have our money now
how about you spending yours and we will spend ours later. And it
was on that basis. And I did not know nor did Mr. Brewer know until
-10-
GOVERNOR: Any state constitution? All the Question is: Does it
violate the lath amendment to the Constitution or the United States?
WALDRON: Well, then did the three-Judge court in Alabama yesterday
reapportion within the framework of the U. S. Constitution -- 37
senators and 105 House members?
GOVERNOR: Temporarily.
WALDRON: Temporarily. I was wondering it your plan might possibly
accomplish 38 senators and 95 house members?
GOVERNOR: It might. It doesn't, but it might. (laughter)
WALDRON: I mean you are definitely thinking of something larger
than this, though?
GOVERNOR: Yes.
WILLS: In both houses?
GOVERNOR: Yes. Any further questions?
Thank you, gentlemen.
HILLS: Thank you.
-2-
this matter came up and that is where the matter stood. Actually there
is more to it there, and there is some question as to whether the
stats obligation had matured. In any event, we had a very fruitful
conference. The access report is being processed, it will be in the
hands of the Bureau of Public Roads very shortly, they will then make
their report back to the Department of Defense and they will make
their report back to us as to what, if anything, they are going to do
in addition to what has already been done. This was the purpose of
my visit to Washington yesterday. Do you have any questions about
that subject matter?
TDTTLB: Will this be a 5050 deal?
GOVERNOR: Yes and no. The agreement was the the whole area from
Patrick to Indialantio was to be 50-50, but, of course, the state
has the authority to use federal aid secondary funds for its 50 per
cent.
TUTTLB: Wind up 75-25?
GOVERNOR: Yes, except that of course we already have the secondary
funds and we leave them somewhere else if we didn't use them there.
You are correct. It is 75-25, but it is not Just that simple.
DELANEY: Governor, you mentioned that you and Mr. Brewer met with
these numerous congressional delegations and Allen McCone. You also
mentioned Mr. John Sutton. Did he play any key part in this
conference with the Air Force people?
GOVERNOR: Mr. Sutton was there, and very effectively brought home
to those that were there the emergency nature of the situation in
getting access over to Patrick and over to Canaveral. And his
participation consisted of representation in this group meeting of
that urgency, and infused some fresh thinking into the minds of all of
us there on that matter. We are working on some other suggestions
that he had with the hope that they will prove practicable and we
can move to more rapidly than this proposes to do to relieve some of
the congested situation there.
DELANEY: Could Mr. Edward Gurney, his Republican Opponent,have
brought that urgency home Just as well?
GOVERNOR: Well, I don't know whether he is aware of it or not.
Hr. Sutton had several times conferred with me about this matter
and it was because I was aware of his keen interest and his knowledge
of the matter that he was invited to go.
DELANEY: No political implications?
GOVERNOR: Perish the thought! (laughter)
DELANEY: Happy birthday! (laughter)
GOVERNOR: Also, Mr. John Phillips was with us, as was A1 Church, and
Mr. Jay Walton Brown.
STARR: Governor, in your talks with Senators Rolland and Smathers
was there anything brought up on the President's statement on
Medicare and how the two senators stood?
GOVERNOR: No. There was not. If there are no further matters
this morning.... (much confusion)
STARR: Governor, the President of Florida Citrus mutual has made
public a statement that he is going to ask you to include citrus
legislation in this special session. Have you heard about it?
GOVERNOR: I got a telegram which I read last night when I came
back and Mr. Ben Hill Griffin had called me about it a day or so
ago, suggesting that this might be done. my first reaction, and
my reaction at the moment is twofold. I don't want anything to
divert us from the business at hand which is the occasion for this
emergency session the business of reapportionment. Two -- there
is some doubt in my mind as to whether or not the imposition of a tax
by this Legislature, or this legislative body, would be legal. It
would be Worse to impose a tax, which litigation would throw out,
than not to impose one at all. However, I hope to have that latter
question definitively resolved, in which case my response to Mr. Sam
Banks, Mr. Max Acres, and I can't remember who else was on the
telegram but those that inquired.by that telegram and Representative
Griffin will be this: when we have completed the business which I
consider to he first and foremost before this legislative body, if
we have legal authority, consideration will then be given to
expanding the call to consider such matters as are deemed appropriate.
STARR: Hell would this open the door then to other reQUestc such
as this?
-u-
GOVERNOR: It would open the door to many, many reQuests, but then
the door hasn't been opened yet. I'm Just pointing at the handle,
as it were.
DBLANEY: Do you have the key?
GOVERNOR: I have one of the keys. The Legislature, of course, has
the others.
WALDRON: Are yOu.going to ask the federal court for an advisory
opinion?
GOVERNOR: Well, we might have to do that. I don't know whether they
will let us consider anything else. It might be better just to
take the tax measure before the federal court and let them decide
whether it is fair and equitable. (laughter) Frankly, this would
impose taxes ad infinitum in certain citrus areas that would not
be borne by those in other areas, and it seems to me that it would
be invidiously discriminatory. (laughter)
TUTTLE: You sound a little bitter.
BRADFORD: Governor, do you as yet, have a specific apportionment
plan that you prepose to advocate?
GOVERNOR: My general plans are as I indicated to you Tuesday when
we had the special press conference.
BRADFORD: Nothing any more specific than that?
GOVERNOR: Nothing that I want to talk about other than that.
WALDRON: There have been some suggestions by one or more senators
that they would like for you to make your plan public so they can
sound out public opinion at home.
GOVERNORzl see the hunting season is on. (laughter)
WALDRON: You don't think that is a good idea?
GOVERNOR: It they can get me to do it, I think it would be a good
idea. Developing a plan of this kind and reducing it to its
essentials is no simple task. One of the things that certainly I
am thinking about is the substantial expansion of the House of
Representatives. If you expand Dede County's delegation to 20 for
instance, or 10 for instance, or 30 for instance, and have 7
candidates per office run, there are certainly problems involved in
etting
70, or 80, or 90, or 100 candidates to the attention of the people.
-5-
Would it be better to have them run by districts? If it's better to
have them run by districts, who shall formulate the districts? Shall
we delegate to Metro that task as the federal government delegates to
us the Congressional task? And then after we delegate to them the
task, shall we turn over the court's question of whether or not
they are properly exercising their discretion in doing that in the
manner or performance of their Job. There are so many Questions
to ansser that I am not prepared at this time to come forward with
this specific proposal for general discussion. I can tell yOu this:
whatever plan is brought forward will be found unsatisfactory by
segments of the population, of course.
DELANEY: Does your substantial expansion of the House that you
mentioned go as far as the BradfordWaldron plan?
GOVERNOR: I hadn't heard about that one.
DELANEY: 1800 House members...
GOVERNOR: Hell, it we are going to get direct proportion it may be
required.
WALDRON: Did you see by the morning paper where the court had
thrown out the 67-senator plan in Alabama?
GOVERNOR: I read a headline to that effect, yes.
WALDRON: Does that alter your thinking at all?
GOVERNOR: No, I think... Here is the problem with which I am raced
in trying to get down to an affirmative solution: we have had
guidelines, such as they were, from the State Constitution. They
are gone. Those guidelines being gone, we look to the Supreme
Court, which has laid down the basis from which those guidelines
were obliterated, to tell us in which direction we shall proceed.
And they say: 'Well follow the lhth Amendment to the Federal
Constitution." I have followed it out to the end and didn't find
there the golden nugget that I was looking for. But then I recall
that they used the words: "Your plan must be such that there is
no invidious discrimination involved," and I am not Just sure
what that means. 80 really what the court has done as of this
moment -- it may correct it in a few moments and change it the
next day -- they have said: "We have struck down all your guide-
lines and we give you no new ones. They don't say to us, "You
-6-
shall be directly proportional. I don't think they do. If they do,
of course, we will have Just a unicameral legislature and obliterate
county lines and divide people up into numerical groups, all of them
equal. I am assuming that invidious discrimination refers to numbers
of people, although that does not appear from the language of the
Opinions. You might say that women shall have as many as men,
otherwise you are discriminating against women, and I would be the
last to do that. Or you might say that each racial group shall have
its representation, or each group of national origin shall have its
representations -- I don't know where that would leave me since I
am not certain where my forebears came from. So. there being no
guidepost that the court has set up to substitute for the one that they
have stricken. the only thing that I can do is turn to the Foderal
pattern as a guide. and that is what I have done and am doing as of
this time. Now it may be that the Federal Court will say that the
Federal pattern is no good and that, or course, is another problem.
But I would hope that when they strike that down, it they do, they will
substitute some other, because when we get into this business of:
"Well, we won't follow the Federal pattern. Instead we will have 17
senators or 90 senators," Well if 90 why not 92--or if 17 why not 40
-- there is Just no guideline, there is no rule, no principle. I was
raised in that old-fashioned school where we lived under a government
of laws and you could look at the law and tell what you are supposed
to do. But I defy anybody. anywhere, to point to the law that tells
the Legislature what it is supposed to do. In that circumstance, we
Just have to do the best we can and hope that it meets with approval
on higher levels.
WALDRON: A technical question: Will the proposal passed by the
Legislature become a part of the State Constitution?
GOVERNOR: I don't know. I don't see how a proposal just passed by the
Legislature could become a part of the State Constitution. I think
we still have to amend it either by vote of the people or by order
of the court.
WALDRON: That was the point I was trying to raise Tuesday -- whether
this plan had to be voted on by the people before it would become
part of the statutes?
GOVERNOR: I don't know. The court has not advised me on that.
-7-
DELANEY: Governor, do you believe that there are substantial
differences between the plan that was stricken in Alabama and a plan
that you might be broadly considering?
GOVERNOR: I really havent followed the Alabama plan.
DELANEY: You are having it checked out in detail by your staff?
GOVERNOR: Yes, we are trying to get the opinion now and get the
background on it in that case as we are in all the cases of all the
diverse courts. But you have to keep in mind that this three-Judge
court in Alabama has not any more idea what the Supreme Court wants
than I do.
MORRIS: Governor, is it your feeling that the Legislature can
achieve apportionment by a simple majority of each house?
GOVERNOR: Yes, sir.
MORRIS: Which would remove the principal stumbling-block to
apportionment which has appeared in the past in the Senate?
GOVERNOR: That is correct.
RILLS: Have you reached any tentative conclusion on the maximum
number in each house -- the maximum number of senators and the
maximum number of representatives?
GOVERNOR: I have ideas in my mind as to what they ought to be which
I am not prepared to talk about right now, but I am not so fixed that
I wouldn't budge for a good reason.
HILLS: Well. what about the physical facilities -- if these new ones
have to sit in the '63 session where will they meet?
GOVERNOR: Well, they will probably spend most of their time running
to Miami to find out if what they have done meets the court's
approval anyway. (laughter) You can keep half of them enroute to
solve that problem. (laughter)
BRADFORD: Governor, are you still of the opinion that three days
will be sufficient -- the remainder of the week between Wednesday
and.Saturday?
GOVERNOR: I know it is sufficient.
BRADFORD: Do you think it will be done in that sufficient time?
GOVERNOR: I don't know. I have been in Washington, you know, since
I left Tuesday afternoon and Just got back last night and, of course,
it is always perilous to try to prognosticate what the Legislature
.8-
is going to do or when it is going to do it, even though I can tell
that a lot better than I can tell what the court is going to do.
(laughter)
HILLS: Has there been any reaction from the legislators?
GOVERNOR: I have been gone. No, I really haven't had a chance.
DELANEY: About this Alabama case, Governor, did I understand your
answer correctly that you do not think the decision there will have
any effect on what the Florida Legislature might do?
GOVERNOR: Oh, I couldn't say that. I didn't mean to say that. This --
certainly it will be a factor in the consideration of every body who
approaches the problem, but I have been trying to read the decisions
of as many of these courts as I could. I have come up inevitably
with the conclusion that these people are not wandering in a political
thicket, they are wandering in a political wilderness. They don't
have a compass, they have never been there, they don't know where
they are going or how to get back where they started.
DELANEY: Who is the "they" you are talking about?
GOVERNOR: These courts. They have nothing to guide them. They are
trying to plow a row as they go and they have no assurance that
what they are doing is going to be acceptable to the Supreme Court
anyway.
TUTTLE: In other words, there is really no relation between what
the Alabama Court might do and what the Miami Court might do and
what the Tennessee Court might do?
GOVERNOR: Well, three men in one place reach one decision and three
men in another place reach another. Any of us who have dealt with
the problem of reapportionment know how difficult it is to get six
different people in two groups of three each to agree on the Florida
situation. And when you insert the differences that there are between
states -- Georgia and Alabama and Tennessee. and so forth -- and then
finally expect them to come up with a rule, the utter impossibility of
the thing rapidly becomes apparent, or it does to me.
MORRIS: Well, is it your feeling that regardless of what the
Legislature does that it will ultimately reach the Supreme Court of
the United States and, therefore, could conceivably color what might
come up at the regular session in '63?
-9-
GOVERNOR: Well, I have tried to -- a distasteful task - but I have
been trying to put myself mentally in the place or a Supreme Court
Justice as they sit there passing review on -- I suppose there will
be 20 or more plans coming up to them. It seems to me about the best
they are going to be able to do, or the worst, depending upon how you
look at it, is when a Legislature brings up a proposal which has met
the local court approval, if it improved the old.situation or is not
too invidiously discriminatory" (whatever that is) to deny
certiorari, and thereby not binding themselves as it were to anything
and yet stop that particular argument for the time being. or course,
as soon as the population of the state changes there are grounds for
s new appeal, or as soon as the mind of the court changes it is
grounds for a new appeal, or as soon as a new plan in another state
is approved and unless someway we can prove that the two are mutually
inconsistent. there is grounds for an appeal. I have not been able
to devise in my own mind -- and, or course, I realize the eminent
Jurists on the United States Supreme Court are not limited by my
mental faculties -- the kind of rule that guides them. I can't.
I Just can't conceive of it. As far as I am concerned, the rule or
law in this area is gone, and we are going to have for all practical
purposes the rule of the individuals whoare going to sit on the
various courts scattered all around the nation. Now. the Supreme
Conrt might solve the problem from their standpoint by saying that
it shall be directly preportional and if it is not it is out -- or if
it is more than 3 per cent off it is out, or something like that,
some slide rule solution. But short or that, I don't understand how
they can do it.
WALDRON: Is there any case settled yet?
GOVERNOR: None of which I know of. (To Evans) Have you heard of any?
EVANS: No.
GOVERNOR: I don't think any of them have gone above these three-
Judge courts, though I could be wrong about that easily.
HALDRON: Well. has the general pattern of the three-Judge courts
been to reapportion within the constitutional framework?
GOVERNOR: No. The general pattern has - which constitution is that?
WALDRON: Any state constitution?
PAGE 1
JULY Al I T, E':152EN~~~~~~~ ~~~~~ PAI.'CPTH hrls:]dngr 41EDFE3lC jITOA Gr~reg riaEnter~e;, LC~DA RODGM 51W5;Veaci Drdfrk i'niP
PAGE 2
G ER R: Ay ttecn'titt? Al h us
PAGE 3
Itfeene 1.e 75--e -eo t sbig r e, it 1. l J1 e 1.. -t1. 'td ... ..... B.... ... .u..i Iod ..r .. r y tI e .l .he...k tIt.rpr bc t h De tet D en nd hywlmk their~ ~ ~ ~ ~.. ....... I.c t. u.. owaifa-tig hy r 0r o
PAGE 4
Nr. A tter hel never-l] rd mee omferred I.-:lth n atot this m:1.tter and St weo because I was aware of 51a keen interest an't his lemledce of -he nas tter that he is i r.v i ted rri 80 DELMIEY: Ho political iT:iplie-!.tierts? GOVENG't: Nrish the thoul-;ht ( a aut;hter ) DELAI]EY: HEppy biPThday! (1riti.--hter) GOVEMIOR' Also, I-1r. John Ph'lllps was villy :a, as t;ae A~. Civ.treh, ar:ri He. Jay lialton Ereb. ETAEG: Ocoerrar, 01 your talks 1-li th 'iellatern i[cilond and Slath-re ins there sirtytidor: berm;;ht up nn the iaresirlent's state:aent on E-ledi :-1re und how 1-he two EGnator3 GioGd? 007EA[10K: U--. TherrHas r->t .If 1.here are r:0 f-nintl-.er Itatters tb i 0 norr.ir::., .(m'.:e h coful lori ) SThiWu Oc.ni rsior, the Pre-sident of l''lorida Citr115 Ph..r-ttal has :nsl: public a stat.eneat that be is goirc to nult you to 1:1clude ci tr's lefjis]Gtim in this special penaica. llave yoti hoord nhot;t it' GOVE!sHGil t -.-;rit a rolel;ralli which 3 reEid ] Eirit nir.ht uhr-n i cale trick nr.fir, Eer. Mill Driffire had called ne ribout it a day or a Dio, mesatini-; thrit this mirht be riene [.ly fir--t react i e:1, rvi Tiy reacti-n at the moment is twofold, I -]on't Marit anyth:i:ig to da v-:rt un C1'e:n the 1;t'Gjlie:-.0 at han'l ti!ii ch .ID the orCanien Ecar this einr;rrency -'erSion -the tu::ir,0:e of 1-2313.-irr enrr.or.t. Tiro -there n rnrie 11-21: 15 my r:-ind as ro whetlier or riot the 1[r.pczitieri of a tax ~r.y to i n Le'.631a.ture, or i.his legislative body, 1:Ald be 1.?::/~! .It 'aeuld be 'aerse t., ir.firur: a ta-c, which li tir;atica irai.ild throw ou' thnr: not 's:arme orie al i. i.11. HMlever, 1 hope to hsve bliat matterr tilv:r,510E dnfini til'ely re-.olverT_, 115 Uhich CEse LTiy re0p..'rde 1:0 Mr. NGil Brrl-::., Mr. E-isz Aeree, erA i can i t reme.-11:er who a]Ge 1180 c'n Clie t-i rc-n -07.0 thse thar, 1:irth re-l by rM1: telegam -sriel leger.sr-r.tative 0111 f ',11 1:111 he tMr, i uhen we hrive e -,1apl ete-] rile business which I es:a de-r lo un fles t and foremot before tiu:: 1er:1:Gatle lady, i f 9:e havra ]eg:11 m t11er1 te enim iderr:t im '::111 ther, be givert to e;xilarA his tM call to cor.sidetmic':1 1:sttka r-.c are deeEr.c-i si[';:.rgndate STAriR : &11 trould 1:bl s re.en the Grer ther. to other req'.;esta wh "dS 1;il -:t?
PAGE 5
T. CI-. '0 3:.: ...I si-er. :.1,.r. ,1::01' La :Er:;, rir.y re:r_1.rsi-, M. t t|En -:llt ler|1 -.r-e ice -t, J.lpt 13.i'-1: p ,iriticr.30 t|-_e |-10:1:1)/-:c -l:.e. --. Dit: Are 7;rr.: -t -r. tl":" ft:'lArcel 2:':rt f-r miciv'::r: 'y C _1, .:-: i .t-r.i:-.t, J -!:1:30 !. :o':: 1ir-t! c a 1 :.. a .elr. 10 -a.1 .1-t'_ 1:..:: 1-c.1, ,,er ,i --. -1 ;!-! L 1 Cil-i!i-' 2Jid ]L1 0 ----I e .Dii: -!-) ~~rr-:": 1 ~ ~ .~ --u wa3.:--::ria 1. |1 ----ei:3 1. E Er. L|-| -t --1 -; -.c.c.-i -1.t -. t i;D G-.r.w-, i -n o a c) e c.1~1e n--i-:[ -0]":00L -C --: ---7;:1 ----I T'l -'; -.' ~--'t '.':y --i''. : : 1 Gri! .:1-:.r" -C ||. Y.i-.-ti1|C B :11i. 4%!10 :1-"101-: "i. ---.---1:00 ----.. .1-:..: i.;: -:a -:r -.r.1cr.t r: -.,.1-1 1:-a. for .--. t .c-.ar 1.1r-.rt Tui.11 -otin ---.C.-i|--clie ciir.ir --..: t:.--. me."... ..cr.. (1 .1-i_;1:Tr:r) 2:-10r r .e -;: 1=: --o..'; e-. -T -t -, T. .c.: 1-. '.:n.: Le! I e -: --. i:r.w-1r.1:ir --lar .:-1 -li.i i e .e 1..:: L 0:I t --.i." i'." r. .:. --. .-L t : .: .:_-~ i. 1 .. C.r.._" ::: /11.11f. -1: : .Br-Il r! ; .r..? -1.--r:ti-:r.". II :u : -..l. -.11.;;i -.:235 --r -. .: -: o or -t c.r .: for ir.::1. -. r:re 1 -1i :rTe": ; -:. r:.."-.a. .-r-.-"r r --rt::~ j-f Erra --'_--7. -;" --L -1.-. -D'-.1-Ur-2.r -c.
PAGE 6
WJuld it be better to have them rur by distrj have them run by districts, who shall formulE we delegate to Metro that task as the federal] us the Cargressional tank? And then after de task, chall we turn over the court 's nuestior they are properly exercisirg their discretior ma.ncr of performance of their jet. There er to ar-swer that I ma rot prepared at this time this specific proposal for general discussion whatever plar. is brought forward wi]] be faun segmerate of the population, of caurae. DELAREY: Does your substantial expansion of mentioned go as far as the Bradford-Waldron p GDVEmiOR: I hadn't heard ibyut that one. MIERNER' I read a headline to that effect, yes. AG3RD:1: }Des that alter your thinking at all? DVERNOR: No, I thide... Here is the problem with which I am faced a trylas to get down to ah affirmative solution: we have had aidelines, such as they were, from the State Constitutier.. They re gone.. Those guidelines heir.s gana, we look to the Supreme yurt, which has laid down the basis from which those guldeljnes
PAGE 7
couye wewl hv us d h-n' thnk Ithe do I t e int 1..,ica --1ps all y
PAGE 8
ns it checked out in rJetati by your sta trying to get the opinion now ard get at case as we are in all the cases of a ou have to keep in mind that t.his three et any more idea what the Supreme Cnurt
PAGE 9
[LLS: Has t:here been any reaction fram the legislators? }VE}ViOR: I have been gane. No, I really haven't had a chance, LANEY: About this Alabama case, Governor, did I understand your 1swer correctly that you do not think the decision there will have y effect on what the Plorida Legislature might do? }VERNOR: Sh, I cealdn't say that. I didn't mean to say that. Th3 rtainly it will to a factor in the consideration of every body vi proaches the problem, but I have toer, trying to read the decisior where they started. A talkina about? e nothing to guide them. They p;re rt they have no assurance that acceptable to the Supreme Court us who have dealt with flault it is to get six sh to agree en the Floride ances that there are betwe 3, and so forth -nad the
PAGE 10
lok at it, is when a Les the local court approval, too "invidiously rliserimi certierari, and thereby r itally.1 -n blc fa urm or ..... ....e ... --..pps heew a .. ..... ....det
|
