legislature's hands, within the provisions of this particular law. Now, we will not take your honor's time in explaining why this provision, and why our courts have praised it so highly, but it is there, and I am sure your honor is familiar with it.
Now, coming to the application of this particular law. We will just mention our contention in this respect and not elaborate. The act commences, "An act inhibiting the teaching of the evolution theory in our universities, normals and all other schools of Tennessee which are supported in whole or in part by public school funds." There is the caption speaking of evolution. When we get to the body of the act: "Be it enacted by the general assembly of the state of Tennessee that it will be unlawful for any teacher in any university, normal or other school in Tennessee supported in whole or in part by public school funds, to teach any theory" any theory—not the theory, not the one contemplated by the legislative mind in the caption, but when we get to the body of the act, which must he responsive in every way to the caption, there is adversity of the act which the act is attempting to make a misdemeanor.
Passing from the first objection, the second objection, in that it violates Section 13, Article II of the constitution of Tennessee. I will not read the part which is rather lengthy, but only the particular provision we have in mind, when we say this particular provision conflicts with the statute:
"Knowledge, learning and virtue, being essential to the preservation of republican institutions, and the diffusion of the opportunities and advantages of education throughout the different portions of the state, being highly conductive to the promotion of this end, it shall be the duty of the general assembly in all future periods of this government, to cherish literature and science."
That is, in this very part of the constiuion is carried with its grant of power, the mandatory duty to cherish science.
Now, may it please your honor, we will have evidence, and now we think simply by appealing to your judicial knowledge, we can show that not only can the legislature not cherish science, but in no possible way can science he taught or science be studied without bringing in the doctrine of evolution, which this particular act attempts to make a crime. Whether it is true or not true, all the important matters of science are expressed in the evolution nomenclature. It would be impossible, if Tennessee wanted to, to strip from modern expressions of science, or announcements of science the evolutionary theory, and therefore, we think this act attempts to cut out of the very provision of the constitution upon which our common school system is based the very purpose for which this power was given.
Now, that will be elaborated a little later.
In that it violates Section 18, Article III of the constitution of Tennessee, in regard to the passage of bills. We will not stress that. We thought possibly some defect might be found, but some other speaker will explain in regard to that, that is with regard to the regularity of the procedure of the legislature at the time this particular bill was passed.
Now, may it please your honor, we come to the most sacred provision of the constitution of Tennessee, and with your honor's permission, I would like to read that.
The Court—Yes.
Mr. Neal—(Reading) "That all men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own conscience; that no man can of right be compelled to attend, erect or support any place of worship, or to maintain any minister, against his consent; that no human authority can, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience; and that no preference shall ever be given by law, to any religious establishment or mode of worship."
Now, may it please your honor, we do not for one moment in this case
