OCR Text |
Show INDICTMENT WILL NOT MASHED DAYTON JUDGE DENIES MOTION IN FAMOUS EVOLUTION TRIAL NOW ON Scopes, Dayton School Teacher, Enters Plea of Not Guilty and Trial Proceeds; Courtroom Is Crowded Daily Courtroom, Dayton, Tenn. Judge John T. Raulston denied the defense's motion to quash the indictment against John T. Scopes. The judge's decision upheld the constitutionality of the Tennessee antlevolution law. The decision took up each contention conten-tion of the defense and ruled that the defandant would be required to plead further. Before his decision on the defense motion to quash, Judge Raulston consented con-sented to pose of photographers with the decision in his hand. After the jfidge read the grounds on which the defense sought to quash the motion he discussed the authorities author-ities cited. Discussing the alleged discrepancies discrepan-cies between the captions of the act and the body of the bill itself, he said: "The general title to the act Is one which is broad and comprehensive and covers all legislation germane to the general subject stated. The title may cover more than the body, but it must not cover less. It need not index in-dex the details of the act, nor give a synopsis thereof." In this particular case, he said, the caption of the act provided that purpose pur-pose of the act is to prohibit the teaching of evolutionary subjects in the public schools of the state. "It is true that this provision is rather general in its nature," he said, "and in my conception of the terms employed in the caption and body, those used in the caption are broader and more comprehensive than those employed in the body of the act, but in my opinion the caption covers all the legislation provided for in the body and is germane thereto, and in no way obscures the legislation provided pro-vided for." . "In my judgment, the caption is sufficient to put any member of the legislature on notice as to what the nature of the proposed legislation is and that the caption is really more comprehensive than the body of the act." The second point, alleging a violation vio-lation of the constitutional provision that the legislature should cherish lit-frature lit-frature and learning in schools of the state, he passed over with a brief statement of the law, since the point had not been pressed by the defense. The next, a purely technical point, charging the bill had not been read a sufficient number of times in the two houses of the legislature before its enactment, also was dismissed with simply a reading of the constitutional consti-tutional provision. |