General McKenzie Charges Interference by Foreign Lawyers.
Gen. McKenzie—The object of the restriction is to give notice to the legislature that they should prevent surprise and fraud in the enactment of laws. However, they are to be construed liberally. In Railroad vs. Tennessee this is fully explained. Another thing, you do not construe these statutes according to their technical sense, unless it is a technical statute; you construe them in common ordinary language, and give them an interpretation like the common people of this state can understand. You do not need experts to explain a statute that explains itself. Under the law you cannot teach in the common schools the Bible. Why should it be improper to provide that you cannot teach this other theory? This indictment says that this is what he did; and that he was a school teacher, employed by a school supported wholly or in part by the public school funds of the state of Tennessee. Now, if the court please, in the construction of a statute, it has to be construed in common ordinary language. In the construction of a statute we don't have to send out and get some fellow to construe it for us.
Mr. Neal—Is the general discussing our motion, or the admissibility of evidence?
Gen. McKenzie—I am replying to the extensive speech of the gentleman over there on evolution, and, incidentally, to your argument. The rule of construction in these matters is in favor of the statute and every doubt must be solved so as to sustain it where that can be done and its constitutionality maintained. You do have to look to the interpretation of the titles as well as to the acts. The questions have all been settled in Tennessee, and favorable to our contention. If these gentlemen have any laws in the great metropolitan city of New York that conflict with it, or in the great white city of the northwest that will throw any light on it, we will be glad to hear about it. They have many great lawyers and courts up there.
Says Sixteen-Year-Old Boy Could Understand Law.
The United States supreme court has also sustained our contention in this matter. As to the scientific proposition, the words employed in the constitution or a statute are to be taken in their natural and popular sense, unless they are technical legal terms, in which event they are to be taken in their technical sense. But this is not such a statute. This is not a statute that requires outside assistance to define. The smallest boy in our Rhea county schools, 16 years of age, knows as much about it as they would after reading it once or twice.
Mr. Malone—We object to this argument. The motion before the court does not involve the discussion of the admissibility of evidence. We are discussing the constitutionality of this indictment on a motion to quash. And I would like to say here, though I do not mean to interrupt the gentleman, that I do not consider further allusion to geographical parts of the country as particularly necessary, such as reference to New Yorkers and to citizens of Illinois. We are here, rightfully, as American citizens.
The Court—Col. Malone, you do not know Gen. McKenzie as well as the court does. Everything he says is in a good humor.
Mr. Malone—I know there are lots of ways of saying—
The Court—I want you gentlemen from New York or any other foreign state, to always remember that you are our guests, and that we accord you the same privileges and rights and courtesies that we do any other lawyer.
Mr. Malone—Your Honor, we want to have it understood we deeply appreciate the hospitality of the court and the people of Tennessee, and the courtesies that are being extended to us at this time, but we want it understood that while we are in this courtroom we are here as lawyers, not as guests.
