|
John T. Scopes |
Are We Still Arguing This?
Some Facts About the Famous Confrontation Between
Clarence Darrow and William Jennings Bryan
Evolution versus the Bible....not on the same playing field. Or, how to follow a truckload of red herring.
The Scopes trial indeed was different
from what was portrayed in the movie, Inherit The Wind, which did not use the real names of the participants. Hollywood is not very friendly to nuanced complicated stories which test our definitions of morality and truth. Here are a few facts about that trial and its background.
Scopes agreed to be prosecuted as a
test of the law.
Scopes was hired primarily as a football coach and math teacher and was substituting in the biology class.
Scopes was under no personal threat of fine or
imprisonment at any time.
Scopes left the Presbyterian Church in
Paducah, Kentucky when church members drove prostitutes out of town
instead of helping them find honest livings.
Scopes doubted the
gospels and the beauties of religion ever after but it wasn't that
big a deal to him.
Bryan spoke at Scopes' High School graduation in
1919 and took a moment to stare down Scopes and his friends for
giggling during the speech.
Darrow made a first
amendment argument that the Bible is not a book of science and should
not be so taught against their better judgements by those who know better and Bryan stood for the right of the taxpayers to
determine what will be taught in school.
As so often happens in difficult
questions, each side was arguing different points, either one or both of
which could be "right," depending on context.
Bryan's initial argument rested on the
people's right to determine what is taught as science in the schools, presumably even if they know nothing about science or are wrong.
(He never addressed what happens if the people decide they want Hindu
or Muslim or Satanist scripture taught as science in the schools.)
Then he argued
(contradicting, or at least turning, his main argument) that evolution was only a
hypothesis and there was no evidence for it, which forever after
became the template and article of faith for the religious argument against evolution.
Bryan mocked the text used by Scopes, George William Hunter's (a teacher at
De Witt Clinton High School, located in Hell's Kitchen at the time),
"A Civic
Biology" for its diminishing of man by lumping him in with
animals, but he never addressed Hunter's long discussion and glowing
endorsement of eugenics in the text and its implied social Darwinist
love of capitalism and rather conservative social sentiments.
Hunter describes two mentally deficient families
as "immoral" and "feeble minded." He says people like these are "true
parasites...if such people were lower animals, we would probably kill
them off to prevent them from spreading."
And this disgusting passage follows:
Parasitism and its Cost to Society. — Hundreds of families
such as those described above exist to-day, spreading disease,
immorality, and crime to all parts of this country. The cost to
society of such families is very severe. Just as certain animals
or plants become parasitic on other plants or animals, these families
have become parasitic on society. They not only do harm to others
by corrupting, stealing, or spreading disease, but they are actually
protected and cared for by the state out of public money. Largely
for them the poorhouse and the asylum exist. They take from
society, but they give nothing in return. They are true parasites.
The Remedy. — If such people were lower animals, we would
probably kill them off to prevent them from spreading. Humanity
will not allow this, but we do have the remedy of separating the
sexes in asylums or other places and in various ways preventing
intermarriage and the possibilities of perpetuating such a low and
degenerate race. Remedies of this sort have been tried successfully in Europe and are now meeting with success in this country.
Blood Tells. — Eugenics show us, on the other hand, in a study
of the families in which are brilliant men and women, the fact that
the descendants have received the good inheritance from their
ancestors. The following, taken from Davenport's Heredity in
Relation to Eugenics^ illustrates how one family has been famous
in American Historv.
We can observe that if believers' critical senses were dulled by Faith in relation to the Bible, this champion of Darwin had dirty genocidal hands on full display in
A Civic Biology.
You can read or
download this book in various formats here:
Bryan ignored these passages that some thought would
have been the best way to discredit the text and further his point
that evolution is an atheistic evil dogma.
|
Dudley F. Malone |
Some say the best speech in the
trial did not come from Darrow or Bryan but from Dudley Field Malone,
a former assistant secretary of state under Bryan, but now an attorney for the defense on Scopes' team paid for by the four year old ACLU..
There is never a duel with the truth. The truth always wins and we are
not afraid of it. The truth is no coward. The truth does not need the law.
The truth does not need the force of government. The truth does not need
Mr. Bryan. The truth is imperishable, eternal and immortal and needs no
human agency to support it. We are ready to tell the truth as we understand
it and we do not fear all the truth that they can present as facts. We
are ready. We are ready. We feel we stand with progress. We feel we stand
with science. We feel we stand with intelligence. We feel we stand with
fundamental freedom in America. We are not afraid. Where is the fear? We
meet it, where is the fear? We defy it, we ask your honor to admit the
evidence as a matter of correct law, as a matter of sound procedure and
as a matter of justice to the defense in this case. (Profound and continued
applause).
He imitated the style used in Bryan's famous "Cross of Gold"
speech which can be heard here:
After the applause in the courtroom
died down Bryan told Malone, "Although we differ, I have never
heard a better speech."
The judge threw out Darrow's main
argument, that religion is not science.
Bryan failed to convince a Jew,
Samuel Untermeyer, and a Catholic, Senator Thomas Walsch, to join the
prosecution.
Bryan did not seek the presence of any of the many black
preachers who rallied in support of his cause.
Fearing for his
health, Bryan's wife did not want him to participate in this trial. She
was very critical of the bumpkins cheering for him...and just about
everyone else. Of the defense team, she wrote this about Arthur
Hays: he "is as forward and self-asserting as the New York Jews
can be." and "his eyes are full of shrewdness."
The
last two days of the trial were moved outside so all could hear the
closing arguments.
On the seventh day of the trial Darrow put Bryan
on the stand. Bryan eagerly accepted the challenge. Darrow's goal was to make Bryan defend scripture as
science. He got him to testify after some evasion that he interpreted
some of the Bible other than literally. (such as the length of a day
in Genesis) And got the famous response to Darrow's question about
the date of the flood: "I do not think about things I don't
think about."
The weather was brutally hot and Bryan was old and
sick.
|
The Scopes Trial Moves Outdoors |
|
Bryan believed, despite all evidence to the contrary, that
Scripture could transform man into a just and peaceful race.
This
trial may have disproved that thesis.
|
Clarence Darrow at the Scopes Trial |
Darrow then asked the jury to find
the defendant guilty, reading the writing on the wall and probably to
prevent Bryan from delivering what was expected to be a strong closing argument.
The judge the
next day ordered Bryan's unfortunate testimony removed from the
record.
July 21, 1925 Scopes was found guilty and trial correspondant H.L. Mencken's
paper, The Baltimore Sun, offered to pay his $100 fine, something that Bryan had done at the beginning of the trial.
Less than a week later, Sunday July 26,
1925 Bryan died.
William Jennings Bryan, was a Christian
liberal (for his day), and a hero to me, yet he was doomed by his naïveté his whole
career. He thought that it was obvious to the people that the gold standard was the source of depression and poverty, neglecting to understand the power of wealth to influence elections. He thought Prohibition was a good idea which would elevate the morals and behavior of the people. He thought he had some influence with President Wilson as Secretary of State but his opposition to World War I lost him his job.