Evolution
Encyclopedia Vol. 3
Chapter 30 Appendix
THE SCOPES TRIAL
TRICKS AT THE TRIAL
Those that forsook the circus antics out on the streets of
Dayton that week long enough to go inside the courthouse—met with more. While
monkeys walked the streets outside the courthouse square, inside Darrow and his
associates were busy trying to make a monkey out of Bryan and Christianity.
As the trial began on the morning of July 10, 1925,
*Clarence Darrow made the first speech. He said that "expert
witnesses" had been called in by the defense and would be giving
their testimony. Immediately William Jennings Bryan objected, declaring that
those men would merely be giving their opinions. In so doing, they
would be able to make extravagant and irresponsible claims without fear of
being cited for purjury, and the trial itself would be reduced to a debate.
Uncertain what to do, the judge permitted one of barrow's "expert
witnesses" to speak. But the statements of the witness were confusing
enough that the judge recognized it would be best to bar all expert testimony
from the trial. But he did permit their remarks to be read into the court
record for the use of a later appeals court. Therefore, although we will here
discuss some of this "expert" testimony, as it is written into the
trial record, keep in mind that the jury only heard the first one.
The initial witness was *Maynard Metcalf of Johns Hopkins
University in Baltimore. Asked to define evolution, he gave a long and very
confusing definition, in which he said that "embryonic development"
was evolution. Of course, this definition is simply not true! The development
of a baby in its mother's womb is not evolution, nor does it have anything to
do with evolution.
*Arthur Godfrey Hays and *Dudley Field Malone, two of
Darrow's fellow lawyers, then presented statements in which they agreed that,
yes, the prenatal development of the child was evolution! To this, Malone
added that a human being evolves all through his life. Bryan then stood up and
set the record straight on what evolution really was.
It is an intriguing fact that evolutionary theory only
survives because of the ongoing efforts of its supporters to confuse issues,
make false claims, hide evidence, and vilify opponents. There really is nothing
scientific about evolutionary theory. It is keyed to emotions, lifestyle,
job-holding, and more besides,—but it definitely is not scientific.
*H.H. Newman, a University of Chicago professor, declared
that evolution is change, and the other view is fixity. Therefore whatever is
change is evolution—biological or otherwise!
*Fay-Cooper Cole, a University of Chicago anthropologist (the
one who received the raise in pay when he returned home), said that fossil
remains of the Neanderthals showed conclusively that their heads "hung
habitually forward," their knees were "habitually bent," and they
walked in a "semi-erect position." Those statements are simply not
true. The Neanderthals were identical to modern man, except that they had larger
brains.
*Kirtley F. Mather, a Harvard geologist, said "there are
in truth no missing links in the record which connects man with other members
[apes and monkeys] of the Order Primates." This is another untruth.
*Dudley Field Malone, the assistant attorney for the defense,
said that evolutionists do not teach that man descended from monkeys. Another
untruth. Bryan rose and replied to this point, quoting Darwin's book, The
Descent of Man, where Darwin wrote that man did descend from apes.
(Along this line, a sizable amount of factual data will be
found in chapter 18, Ancient Man, which provides in-depth replies to
Cole, Mather, and Malone's arguments in regard to the origins of man.)
Then *Arthur Hays, Darrow's other associate attorney, stood
up and tried to hedge on a legal technicality. The Tennessee law declared that
public school teachers should not teach that man descended from lower forms of
life. Hays declared that teaching that man descended from monkeys was no
violation, since all were in the order of Primates!
It was on the third day that Darrow objected to starting
each daily opening of court with prayer, saying it was prejudicial to his
side of the case. The judge ruled that since prayer was customary and not an
innovation at this particular trial, it would continue. The judge went on to
point out that Darrow was inconsistent, since he and his associate attorneys had
earlier declared that evolution and religion are consistent and not opposed to
each other.
The court then turned the matter over to the local
ministerial association, which, because of Potter's petition, decided to let all
further court prayers be given by pro-evolutionist pastors.
This theme that Bible religion and evolution were in accord
with one another came up again and again, as different witnesses spoke. So much
so, that Scopes himself later admitted that the witnesses "had been
carefully selected in order to prove that orthodox Christians also believed in
evolution" (quoted in Ray Ginger, Six Days or Forever [1958[, p. 136).
*Maynard Metcalf regularly taught a large Sunday school class
in Chicago, and testified at the trial:
"There is no conflict, no least degree of conflict, between the Bible
and fact of evolution, but the literalist interpretation of the words of the
Bible [that it means exactly what it says] is not only puerile; it is
insulting, both to God and to human
intelligence." —*The World's Most Famous Court Trial: A Complete
Stenographic Report (1925), p. 242.
*Walter C. Whitaker, pastor of a large Episcopalian church,
said: "As one who for thirty years has preached Jesus Christ as the Son of
God and as 'the express image of the Father,' I am unable to see any
contradiction between evolution and Christianity." As a leading minister of
his denomination, Whitaker served on the board that decided on the theological
competency of all new pastors seeking to be hired by Episcopalian churches.
Here is an example of how *Darrow conducted himself during
the trial:
"Darrow himself, completely unscrupulous and without personal
integrity, bluffed shamelessly. He said: 'Are your mathematics good? Turn to 1
Elijah 2 . . ' (there is no such book in the Bible.) Then he said, 'is your
philosophy good? See 2 Samuel 3 . . ' (This chapter is a historical account of
events during the time of David.) Next he asked, 'is your astronomy good? See
Genesis chapter 2, verse 7 . .' (This verse is about the creation of man and
has nothing to do with astronomy:) Finally he asked, 'is your chemistry good?
See—well, chemistry—see Deuteronomy 3:6 or anything that tells about
brimstone.' (This verse has nothing to do with chemistry or brimstone.)" —Donald
W. Patton, "The Scopes Trial, "in A Symposium on Creation III
(1971), p. 110. (see page 84 in World's Most Famous Court Trial, for
transcript of this.]
Darrow's questioning of Bryan was blasting. So much so, that
Darrow was held in contempt of court for his conduct. This was a serious charge,
but when he apologized, the judge rescinded it. Repeatedly, Bryan was insulted
and humiliated by Darrow, but Bryan made no attempt to retaliate with
vindictiveness. At one point in the trial, Darrow told Bryan in derision,
"You insult every man of science and learning in the world because he does
not believe in your fool religion" (World's Most Famous Court Trial, p.
288).
Bryan clearly pointed out that evolution taught that man had
gradually risen from lower forms of life, and therefore was directly opposed to
the Biblical account of the Fall of man. If man had not fallen, then he did not
need Christ, Calvary, and salvation.
You have just completed APPENDIX
30
NEXT—
Go to the next chapter in
this series, CHAPTER 31-A-
SCIENTISTS SPEAK |